THE BOLL WEEVIL 



AND 



COTTON CROP 



OF TEXAS 




W. J. CLAY 

COMMISSIONER. 



AUSTIN: 

■lUE STATE PRINTING COMPANY, 

1SX)5. 



lt58-805-3^m. 
DEPARTMENT OF 
AC4RI0ULTURE, INSURANCE, STATISTICS AND HISTORY 
AUSTIN, TEXAS. 



A STATISTICAL STUDY 



DECREASE IN THE TEXAS COTTON CROP 



THE MEXICAN COTTON BOLL WEEVIL 



AND THE 



COTTON ACREAGE OF TEXAS 

1899 TO 1904 INCLUSIVE. 



By E. DWIGHT ^ANDERSON 
Recently State Entoiiiolosrist. 




The Mexican Cotton Boll Weevil Magnified ti4 Times. 



AUSTIN, TEXAS: 

STATE PRINTING COMPA.SIY 

IJtOo. 



cp 



<^^c,^ 



^'*> 



INTRODUCTORY. 



Toward mitigating- the losses occasioned by the cotton boll weevil 
accurate statistics of the cotton crop for each county of the infested 
area are of the utmost importance, for the loss due to this insect is 
now so great that it must exercise an increasingly important influence 
upon the market price of cotton. A short crop means a higher price, 
but it not infrequently happens that the higher price is not realized 
by the farmer, the rise in price taking place after he has sold the bulk 
of the crop to parties who realize the profit. If the farmer received 
the price for his cotton which the market supply warranted the loss 
occasioned by the weevil would in many instances be largely palliated, 
for there is more profit in but 1/4 ^ale per acre at 10 cents per pound, 
as in 0.4 bale at 6 cents. The quicker and more accurately that the 
actual amount of damage due to the weevil and the total product of the 
infested area can be forecasted each year and the statistics placed in 
the hands of the farmer, the more likely he is to sell his crop intel- 
ligently and to realize the most that the market will warrant. Such 
statistics will of course be of most value to the infested area in years 
of an average or short crop in other States and of less value in years 
of a bumper crop. These facts are of course almost axiomatic, but 
may well receive special consideration at the present time when the 
immense crop of 1904 has perhaps somewhat obscured the probable 
influence of the boll weevil as a factor in the amount of the cotton 
crop for 1905 and future years. 

Past Estimates. — The first estimate of the amount of damage by 
the weevil was made by Mr. C. H. Tyler Townsend, then field agent 
of the Division of Entomology of the United States Department of 
Agriculture, in December, 1894. (Insect Life, Vol. VII, page 308.) 
He estimated that one-sixth of the cotton producing region of the 
State was infested, the damage in the infested region being 90 per 
cent and this amounting to 15 per cent of the crop of the State. This 
was undoubtedly quite excessive. The counties infested in 1894 and 
in 1899 formed but 5 per cent of the cotton acreage of the State and 
probably had about the same proportion in 1894. In 1899 they produced 
but 4 per cent of the total crop of the State. 

In August, 1902, Prof. F. W. Mally, in his Eeport Upon the Boll 
Weevil, gave an estimate of the percentage cf injury in each of the 
infested counties, making a total of 235,969 bales loss for 1902. These 
estimates were made before any figures could be secured apon the total 
yield for that year and at a season when the injury by the weevil is 
at its worst. Consequently it is not surprising that the actual yield of 
the infested counties as shown in our tables indicates rather less injury 
than was anticipated by Prof. Mally for that year. Mr. W. D. Hunter, 
in charge of the boll weevil investigations of the United States 



4 Boll Weevil and Cotton CRor or Texas. 

Department of Agriculture, in Januar}^, 1903 (Farmers' Bulletin 163, 
TI. S. Dept. Agr.), gave $10,000,000 as a conservative estimate of the 
damage clone in 1902, which is practically that given in Table 1. 

In November, 1903, at the second Texas Cotton Convention at Dal- 
las, Mr. Hunter estimated the injury for 1903 at about $15,000,000. 
(Proceedings 2d Ann. Texas Cotton Conv. p. 74, and Farmers' Bulle- 
tin 189, p. 13.) 

In December of the same year the writer made an estimate of the 
amount of damage done based upon a comparison of the crops of 
tlie infested and uninfested counties for 1902 and 1903 with that of 
1899 as given in the bulletins of the United States Census. (Pro- 
ceedings of the Society for Promotion of Agricultural Science, 1903, 
pp. 157-170, reprinted as Circular 8, Entomological Department, Texas 
Agr. Exp. Station, Apr., 1904.) Upon this basis a loss of 445,956 
bales for 1902 and 500,000 for 1903 was indicated. At that time the 
writer became fully aware of the impossibility of making any accurate 
estimate of the damage done by the weevil without a knowledge of the 
Gctual acreage of each of the injured counties for each year since its 
infestation, with the average yield per acre prior to the advent of the 
weevil for each county. This is clearly shown by a comparison of the 
estimates in the years given below with those then made. Though the 
estimate for 1903 was approximately correct, that for 1902 was more 
than double the probable correct amount as now shown by the writer 
and previously by Hunter and Mal]}^ 

To determine the injury done by the weevil with any degree o^ 
accuracy it is necessary to ascertain the yield per acre for each county 
in the injured and uninjured area and to compare this with the 
yield per acre of the same counties prior to injury by the weevil. This 
will give the decrease of production due to the weevil in the counties 
known to have been injured, except as influenced by storms, floods, 
and insects, such as the boll worm, which factors it is almost impossible 
to estimate in many cases. 

Thanks to the excellent system of ginners' reports now employed 
by the United States Census Bureau it is possible to secure the actual 
product of each county for each j'^ear since 1899, with the greatest 
accuracy possible. 

From 1887 to 1895 the Commissioner of Agriculture of Texas in his 
an.aual reports gave the acreage and product of each county. For a 
few years the yield per acre was given, but most of them have been 
computed by the writer. After computing the average yield per acre 
fcr each county for each year from 1887 to 1895, the average yield per 
acre for the nine years for each county was found, which with the 
minimum and maximum yield per acre during that period is given for 
each county in Table 2 below. These figures formed a very accurate 
means of determining the actual average crop of each, county prior to 
the advent of the weevil. It remained to secure the acreage for each 
county since 1899, the acreage of 1899 being given by the Twelfth 
United States Census and probably being the most accurate obtainable 
upon Avhich to base estimates of subsequent acreage. 



THE COTTON ACREAGE OF TEXAS. 



Upon application to the Bureau of Statistics of the United States 
Department of Agriculture in 1903, we were informed that no statistics 
of acrenge by counties were available. Other sources from whom esti- 
mates of any reliabilitv could be cocurcd were therefore sought. For- 
tunately the two leading newspapers of the State, tl ;^, Dallas-Galveston 
"NTcws and Houston PosI, have for the pa'>t few years gone to considerable 
expense in collecting and publishing the reports of from 300 to 500 
leporterfc for each paper, upon the acreage, con.lition, and yield of 
cotton end other crops during each season. Through the courtesy of 
tlie management of these papers the writer was given access to iheir 
file?. Each report was scrutinized, and the average acreaga for each 
county, and the number of reporters, w^?- tabulated as given by each 
paper. The railroads of the State also make fre<|uent estimate? of tlie 
acreage and probable crop of cotton along their lines to aid in prepara- 
tion for its movement, and through the courtesy of the officials of 
the Oolf, Colorado and Santa Fe, Houston and 'Texas Central, Hous- 
ton East and West Texas, San Antonio and Aransa? Pas^, Missouri, 
Karjsas and Texas, St. Louis Southwe.-^tern and Fort Worth and Rio 
Giande, we were furnished with copies of reports of their agents as 
far as available. During 1903 and 1904 some 200 voluntary entomo- 
logical observers scattered over the State reported to the writer as 
State Entomologist at frequent intervals upon the insect injuries of 
their vicinity and also upon the increase or decrease of cotton acreage, 
injury by weevil and probable crop. The number of observers and 
average report upon acreage for each county was likewise tabulated. 
A circular letter was then prepared and over a thousand copies sent to 
county assessors, postmasters and railroad agents asking their opinion 
upon acreage for their counties. In 1903 the State Statistical Agent 
of the United States Department of Agriculture, Mr. Oswald Wilson 
of Fort Worth, commenced recording the reports upon crops by counties 
and schedules w^ere prepared by him giving the acreage for each county, 
and upon these, each report was recorded and arranged by counties. 
Through the courtesy of Mr. Wilson we were allowed to summarize these 
reports and tabulated the number of reports and the average report 
upon acreage for each county for 1903 and 1904. Among the.se 
sources of information there is but little choice as to accuracy and an 
estimate must be made from an average of all. The reports from all 
sources were therefore assembled upon a card for each county upon 
wliich was also given the product for each year as given by the census 
and the acreage of 1899 as a basis for subsequent acreage. The reports 
of the railroads mentioned above were given by stations. It was neces- 
sary to assemble these by counties and to then weight the report of each 
agent according to the proportion of the total crop of the county 
handled by his station, which was done with the aid of the tables on 



G ■ Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas, 

Sliipinents of Cotton by Eail in Bulletins 19 and 28, Division of Statis- 
tics, United States Department of Agriculture. The cards thus used 
were ruled as shown below for Brazos county, 

BEAZOS COUNTY. 

First infested, 18S)8. First injured, 1900. 49,213 acres. 22,069 bales. 0.44 bales per acre, 1899. 



Bales and bales 




1900. 


1901. 


1902. 


1903. 


1C04. 


per acre. 


18,473 


0.41 


20, l:;i5 0.47 


15.038 


0.37 


15,212 


.38 


20,009 


.44 


Source. 


ifi 

c P. 




3 
< 


do 
P5 




?-' 

s 

< 




o5 

Oho 


< 


5a 




■j5 

o 


4 


0^ 


9 
3 
< 


Dallas News 

Houston Post... 

Railroads 

Observers, Indi- 
viduals, etc 

U. 8. Aids 

U. 8. Schedule.... 


2 
4 

1 



9.5 

85 

100 




4 
3 


100 
90 

110 




4 
3 

1 


95 
9.3 




4 
3 
4 

2 

2 


8(5 
81) 




2 

4 


115 
109 
















80 








1 


100 




107 
6. 














14 


105 














62,000 










Combined esti- 
mate. 


1 7 


90 


44,300 


8 


93 


42,C85 


8 


95 


40,000 


15 8.5 


40,000 


20 


108 


45,000 



On this card the number of bales at head of column for each year 
ie that given by the census, while the bales per acre were estimatetl 
upon the number of acres as calculated at the foot of the column for 
that year. In most cases the weighed average of reports from all 
sources was taken; that is the number of reports from each source 
was multiplied by the average as reported, these added and the sum 
divided by the total numlber of reports. In many cases, however, from 
personal knowledge of the conditions in that county, or from apparent 
ina<:curacy of certain sources, they were disregarded in favor of uniform 
evidence from the majority of sources. The line giving "U. S. Aids" 
gives the summary of reports made to the State Statistical Agent, 
United States Department of Agriculture as far as they could be 
classified by counties. The line "U. S. Schedule" gave the estimate 
of acreage prepared by Mr, Wilson and used upon his schedules for 
making estimates, the total of which was practically the same as the 
Department's estimate of June, 1903. This was found in many cases 
to give a much larger acreage than any sources of information war- 
ranted. In such cases the highest figures reported for acreage of the 
county were usually used as the final estimate and often an additional 
acreage was added, to obviate any possibility of underestimating where 
there was still a large difference between the two figures. This is only 
for 1903 as the schedules were prepared in that year. The basis of 
the present acreage of the Department of Agriculture was therefore 
given careful consideration for each county, but this estimate of county 
acreages was merely for office use and not for publication. Thus in 
Brazos county in 1903 all sources of information would have shown a 
marked decrease in acreage, 15 per cent, which would have given 34,000 
acres based on the estimate of 40,000 for 1902. But as the De- 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop op Texas. 7 

]-);irtment's schedule gave 63,000 acres we made our final estimate of 
the acreage as 40,000 acres allowing no^ decrease from 1903. In other 
Avords, though our estimates for 1900, 1901 and 1903 are most probably 
(correct for this coun+y, and though there was undoubtedly all of 15 
per cent decrease in 1903, in order not to by any means underestimate 
the acreage, in view of the Department's very large increase over 1899, 
we practically added 6000 acres. This was done in numerous instances, 
so that our estimates of the total acreage of the State or of groups 
of counties are uniformly higher than the reports warranted, though 
very much below the figures officially published by the Department. 
I'he total number of reports for each county as far as collected for 
each year was quite variable, but for the leading cotton counties was 
rarely under five and usually averaged between ten and fifteen. 

Having illustrated the writer's method of, estimating the acreage it 
will now be of interest to consider the acreage of the State as a 
w liole and of the different groups of counties from year to year and 
to compare them with the estimates from other sources, especially 
those made by the United States Department of Agriculture, which 
are the only official figures annually published upon acreage. 

Commencing with 1899 the reports of the United States Census 
r.iusi be taken as the official 'figures, for they are based upon an actual 
canvas of the territory and are the only published figures giving the 
.acreage for each county. The Department of Agriculture has never 
joublished any estimates of the acreage of each county, and as far as 
the writer can ascertain never computed the acreage for each county 
in I'exas until 1903, when estimates were made based upon the census 
figures, and were tabulated for use in making future estimates, as 
previously mentioned. The report of the census showed 318,000 acres 
more in Texas and 754,000 acres more in the United States than the 
estimate of the Department of Agriculture. 

Our estimate for 1900 shows 97.9 per cent of the acreage of 1899 
or a decrease of 146,795 acres. For this year the Department of 
Agriculture gave an increase of 8 per cent. In the final estimate 
published by the Department (Bull. 28 Div. Statistics, see Table IV.), 
it is stated that the estimates have been revised '^^to bring them into 
reasonable conformity with those of the United States Census.'^ To 
the Department's estimate of December, 1900, of 35,034,734 acres for 
United States was evidently added 733,405 acres to give the 35,758,139 
acres for United States as finally published, which would represent 
very closely the difference between the census figures and those of the 
Department in 1899. 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 






o% 



•1{A89M 

enp ssoi sai'sq lu^ox 



•sasiiuo J9ino Jlt.{ ssoT 



•soi^liinoo pri.inf 
-ut ui asBajoap sojBq ibjox 



•saijunoo 
p 9 J n fur aSuajo-B unin 
-[oo is-Bi asB.aJtoap saiTsg 



•saHunoD pajnfuuin .loj 
asBaJoap jo asBa.ioui — .10 
-|- asBejoap ajo« jad saiug 



•ajoB jaj 



•saiBa 



•aaoB jaj 



•sai'Ba 



^SBT JO aS^aJOB Jo ^aao .laj 



•s-TBaX OT snoiA 
•aad joj ajou aad aSuaaAV 



•sa.TOV 



•a.TOB aaj 



rt CO 



•sai'Ba 



•S68t-i8«l aJOB 
.lad saiBq ui piai.C aSBjaAV 



•aBBii uaAiS UI 
aSBa.TOB ib;oi jo ^uao jaj 



•fi68I HT 
^onpojd iB^o^ JO iuao jaj 



•j^jntuisnouas qs.TM 



•nA99M. Xq pa'jsajni ^s.xi^ 



S? 






tH -J^ t~ 



L^ -c 1 ■-! vQ I 2 



COr-(_ 
CO 



-;0 

CO-H 



■* 1£ Tj< 1© 

Ol OS C; 05 I 

0000X00 I 



?:885 

00 OS Cft OS 



<!l pa 



^ Si ^ 



•JB9A 



c o 



OS 01 

O c3 



P3 
? a. 



V,o H 



am 






g 




Sod 


0) 




.So 


ja 




oO* 








P 


a 


-H C 





0/ 


o3 e3 


ou 





o3 






^M 



J3 !- T-l OJ 

O ^ d 03 



o s;o3 - 

!h SI'S CS 

•3 wO H 



'^-' ^ 

^B 



_;CB 



7; 


0^ 


■c-^ 






d 




0? 




iib 


>u 


+^■3 


o-a 


a> o3 




>< 


^S 


ftM 


P*^ 


on 




u 


da. 


5« 


fl-o 


dfl 


o3 


i'< 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 











o 

s 

8 

IN 














s 




















c 
o 






















Brazos 

River 

flood and 

boll worm 








S 



St 

o 

.;2 
































1 










(N 














1 
















f 










00 

1 














1 
















S 
f 










o 

r 

1 














r 

1 
















ShS 








s 














•^ 
















00» 
CO 1—1 








1 

IN 












































3 














g 




























g 
S 

N 














S 


















1 












00 

g 1 














I i 






u 

>> 

CO 










o 














o 


O : 










1 


o 


So 








286,654 
893,340 
686,240 


TJCO 

IN 5^ 

---00 
o?co 


t- O O lO lO 

ai -* o -ai CO 
■* 05_ t^ -^ o 
■* cf o oT •* 
Tf< -^ in -^ o 
tri^ IN 00 f^-i^ "^ 
t-T i-T 


OOr-S 

-o ■* 


7,228,960 

193, ?50 

260,810 

704,250 

758,130 

395,590 
245,730 

116,840 

2,674,91)0 
4,914,8-'0 

7,589,720 

168,100 
452,770 


1 

■■o 


g ^ 8S ISSjS 2 S S5SjS5q S S. S S g ?3S g? 


^^ 


^. s ^^ 




66.471 
248,834 
195,358 


510,1 3 

l,987,8v0 

2,498,013 

46,475 

207,446 

286.1C6 
100,251 


ogco 
os-i 

-J5 00 


2,471,081 

39,191 

59,334 

1SS,169 

228,1.88 

13:t,370 
70,358 

38,323 

758,133 
2,3»1,083 


S 00 eS 

-T o CO 

CO 


i 


ta ta iO 

TT Tji -.}< 


lo lo 1 OS lo lo ri " 

Tjl -O I CO -V TJ1 ^ Ttl 

• CO 1 ■ " • " • 


~^ 


05 OlOlOINi-iaC'N (iioioa 

CO Tjj-w-flj-^-^coos 1 —CO 1 CO 

hi' 
















IN 




: 










S 
















1 la 

1 CO 








S 










in 

CO 












IS 






IN 












^ 


1 








cr o OiN C<l 

00 3-. S 3-. S 
















; 11111111 1 






1 








"? S ?r3 1 

^ 00 00 ^- 1 






lO cc ^. 1— 1 M 

i s 1 sil 










lO lO 00 05 r-l IN -^ X CO 
r^ ^ CA . O n t -?; o 

22 S iiSSSo — 2 






1 

1 

1 








K 
p 

g 

c 
i. 
a 
.fl 



c 

X 
t- 

<N 

g 


< 

g 

a 

C 

50 


c 

3 
. C 

C 
c 
a 

B 
a 
C 

OS 


u 


a 
:- 

c 

E- 


1 

o: 

c 



PC 




q 

c 

■s 5 

C 
X 


p: 
■< 

3 
C 


C 

3 
C 
u 

c 

'e 

a 
C 


, 3 

1 

3 
a, 
C 


i< 


0. 

3 

H 

o- 

c 






c 
c 



p: 




■a 
C 


a c 

3 3 

o c 

O C 
d 3 

IP a 
XI x: 

3 3 
O C 

(M l> 

o 

<3= 


a c 

c e 
3 

"3 d 

C 3 

D 0, 

O C 

r-l lO 


3 
3 
C 

"i 
-*- 
a 


1 

c 

a 

c 

b- 


q 

0) 

"S 
« 

X 

3 
c 









Hi 

a 

3 
3 

c 

T3 

•2 
= 

3 
5 




a 


Injured In 1903 with Normal 
yield in 1904 

5 Central Group A 

Bell, Hays, Limestone and 
Wi lllnnisnn 









10 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 



•S3J0\' ] 



'^ u^ c o o ic ira 



>0000 IQ OQOQi: 

> = o = o o oooo; 

> = 'S' t^' -- -H ox -■=■■■ 



CO iC t- ~ TO 



lo X 00052 oc 



•8JDB 

.1 fld[ 



OTOt--"OCOr)(N3>ff<r-l— l|Q — i-^ITO-frHI"--!-! 0-3<TO3J-|TO MN-'J'^t-lO 
— 1_<— (lNrH.-j(N5^0^--*M«5 (NnTO'-l'-H— ION iQ-T>lOiaOliS nTOnS^KI-l(M 



•sairaa 



<N O 10 I- ■* 00 It? 2S TO O ^ IC ^ 
OTO■*^^^^»^ "J^ OTl<iO30-r 1-H 



x~-~-r-i;TO,„ ... 

XTO"*-1'L->17>I|TO OOTOt>.JX -f^o^ciTOua 

l-»-H-r_t-TO T^ C0_ :^l^O »C-*^ IN IQOOTO MTOTON^ 

qo'to^ To :% (N "DcT-H -f ~r s> ^^ '•t'oio'm' 

i-iSO 10 NN^rtrHOO ^^ iN-HTOi-l<N 



00000 oo< 

§_; oooooc 
^ooo,o5to< 
Ot-^x'-Hrn'o C 



Sooo 
rHOO 



o 0000000 lO 00000 

CO o=o-rooo -*■ Soooc 

■^ oocDX^Oioo C5^ o^o::^0"^ 

t-- TO r-Tu^ L'^to'T-'io I o" ooocTuT 

t- XO 1^0 rr-^rTN^ 



888SS8S 

I- TO ;, r_X_0_0^ 
I- -iTuO Orj'o'o' 

[- oiooooo 



.1 aj 



OtOO-fOSTOMOM'-IO^-. 
TP'J'OTOOXTO-^MTO OON 



IN lOOCSCOiOMNlX QOXrHlOfHIOT inXh-TO-^rHSO 






TOTO -^ '7' "^ 



•sajBa 



^ c; ^ -^iN Tj*o5TOooo; N r 

N XTO^XOOt^t-l ^_^~^0(M_OT 
oTl-^-^ 05:0" ^T-n'^TOiO 



':!' — lie TO X 



??[t 



: O rH !0 



50 N O O O 
0^0 X 50 

ICVO-JDXO 



rt TO TO CO '^ 0» t- 

— .-I-TO 1" 00 

coi-co_io^ao o^i-^ 
t-H r-Too -TlOr^"^ 

i-H rHi-HNi-tN 






0000 .00000000 

lOiao :O=0O0Q00 

r-^Jl^O :-»eDOTO JOOC_ 

cTr-Ti^ ;Nor oT'^iHcoor 



0^00; 
o •-; =■ Q ■ 

"©TO ^N 



o =; o 00 

^ O Q O N 



N CO I— IfT -< L^ N X as -.C O 3J O O 



O OOOOOC 
TO _; o o — o c 
CO -i^co c: 'Ht-^c 



•9J0B 
.1 f J 



X^O ;TOrtTOl~t-0OiraX 



X) ^07:0'C-fU3 



07:0'C-fU3 liO TO— •— '""ITO 110 irt^— ^OiOD»it>"— 
TO-^N— iNN IN COTOTOTO-* TO IN TO N ^ N N N 



: O 00 T. 3i 10 O t- ■-= 

; •.:; TO 05 L~ o X -"^ TO 

■ 10 1-4 1-H 00 "* I^S^N^ 

00 00 i-Toi" 



to 0-. -.O to TO X N !- ^ 

TO o 2 :^! o o TO o I I- 

N OOOTON— i-H -^ 

xT ^t-^ONr-T -3< -O" 



TX r X05 

Oi TO O'— 'tr 
■* O_-T_C0 33_ 

U3'ra T-r-jso 



00 •* MTOO^Sg 
ttN TO 05 O lO Q 
b- — I— ( rT-nCO^ 
ONCO-H-HION 
(N N rH TO ?■) N 



•S3J0V 



0100 :00 :QONOO'r— OIOOOOOOIO OlOOQO 
OTOO :-w«0 :OOQOO|M OTOOTOI--TOX ^X— <00 

CO^CSOoToON 5C~ -H CON-4" ox 






^ Oi ; t- •?' f-H IN 31 
i-H lOT 1-1 I 



00 X S Oj_o6 o o 

!^^ I- -I^N N to -H 

05 o»-<ooo 



•a JOB 
J aj 



(M TJi N ; N TO 



00 O500 TOC- - 
TO TO *^i N TO -H ' 



' Tf< O 



N 



Oi 1^ N ■* 0» 
TO -^ -^ -^ TO 



' 31 m 3S 00 X lO 
1 rH N N 55 M TO 



— OiO-~-— 136-H :— < !D --KpHl^ 

OTOX'QOCOOOS |C1 r^TOGO--'^ 

■*t-^NlSTOTON^ ^ '^-i®°i*i 

rHN-Tof-H t^ O 000' ' ~ ' 

N M 1-1 I- ^ N 



•sajBa 



■^tOX :00rH — iTOrtO^ 

t^N^lO ;^Oi^ i'^^'-'^*^'^ 
•"jJoON i «r jlNi-T rHoT 



00 o' t-^ XOJ 



^^»i^00 O TO 05 lO 
1-TO ^ X X TO L— 
■C '«_TO_ X_,— (,l-;.-.0 
C-li-Tlii l-TTO'oTt-^ 
(N N rH I" N N 



•sajov 



8^8 

1000 L-; 

0D"in«c 



00000000 

: -7- CO O O O' . - — O 
: -^i^tD^TO 00 N tO^l^ O 

l>roo lOTTiHrToT 



So -Mn 00 o 
O N t- O lO = 
■_^i-lO.-t--TOO 

CO too t-T-^-H^ 



= 000 

TO 00_ O 
N^TO^X^^O I- 

•-T-^TOo •>r 

10 '<T' -r N N 



S58SiSSS 

-ri- o^ /: 0^10 

00 ^ *r N N CO oT 

X i-i O: to rt O t- 



•a-ioB 
J aj 



CST-10& tO-HlO-^t— 1--^'51 

-*XlO :t--JO»tDU3.-HON 



TO I- TO to ^ ^ ri 
•I— I TO »0 ^H O TO lO 



O --H X O N 



CS »H ^T TO to b* ta 



•saiug 



-H t-O 
10 -^ ■* 
(NOOX 



:XTOlOOTO-HOai— 
: O i-c 00 .-1 Tl TO -H 1- 
: 1-* IC s^t O ^J* U3 to lO 
: >-H-H sTiN 05 IN U3 



rHN : r-( !N rH 



TOTOO-*Oi 

t- 1- - _; j> 

O -3; 00 00 O 
OOOtOOTO 



lUJUU to O TO I 



»0^ O liOTO O^ 



•sa.iov 



; •-t-OT .TONi-HUO-l" 

;N-li iOt-OSXC^I 

:-^t^ :(-HL-tOO'^ 

tINt- i-^COrHNoT 



— . .. i-*o 
01 u5 tr S TO ;~ TO 



eOTO'ONr-i 00 I "-H 

UT O rl I-H ^ TO 



lO TOCOOOl 
N T-H _ IC OS 
CCN O L-rt_ 

coor-H^oiip 



I- to ■<5< TO - TO 00 
lOOS O .X.N 

r-?'>'oorx"coc» 

OS r-H 01 ^ "-H O t- 



•a JOB 
jaj 



rHCOt-l :U3i-l 
N CO N :TO -^ 



50rt.^O>H 



t- O TO X mi- O t- 
TO '^J'TfNCOTOtO^H 



•saiua 



Oi -^ 5D 
Oj_._-^00 

co'^'oo 



OOX :lOTO 



TOlO 

lOTO 

X -^ 



10 'T TO »0 to 
r- ( -M O TO ir; 
IC TK 10 00 --"- 



■ OS'* 1-0 

■ ^ OS 05 10 

-^O -H CS .vj^ 
J'NlO'rHod 



rl X TOTOQOrH 2< 
to X t- N TO TO X 
NX rr O^N --^^ 
O «D L-^Q CO tp'n' 



•aSB 

-J9AV 



. , ., . ,_ NXlOOStOTON 

TO'*TOTOCO^NTro5-**r3iO -^ TrTp.*-^iOTrTO 



SOONt-CNOQtDO-* |0 
3CO ^ N TT CO ■* *OlO ■^ 



t^ Tji N -'J' -gi 
■* ■■T 10 ■* to 



OM tOXOlOlO 



'lunui 
■IX B JM 



t--os(XX'3<i-c3>rtcot-o:o 
■wt-SooiciomtDJOooxi- 



—.N 0000 too 

X 00 L- to 10 



OI>.T)<I>.CO 

to -J L- O X 



O 10 lO tH t— O T^J 

10 X J to o to to 



uiniu 



0-<— 'rHOTOTOMXO O-r 
r-.lN-^O'HTOOTO'-llNNTO 



10 X m 1.- I- X ■* 
NNSONTO -^<N 



o ■^oo■* 

■^ CO TO jN TO 



soO'Hoo ■* 010 



•pajnfui 



•(IliSI up 
X.inrni a.iaAas isjij 



OS OS ". OS OS o OS 

X /- X X 00 ^: X 



paisa.iui 
■; e J I ^ 



lO Tti 10 -" '* -111 ** »C ■»J' -" -^ 
Cs OS -"S OS "^ OS OS ..-s OS OS ""OS 
OOXQOjlOOOOXXXXOOOO 



10 10 ifl us -r 10 

OS Cb ^ OS J-. It '. 

00 ii- X 00 X 00 00 



00 X 9E X X 
5500 xao X 



X X X X X I- t- 
Os _. ^OS OS 

X X X 00 00 X 00 



2»3 

u on 

o o 

X3 o 
S S3 I 



iM?? 



03 , 






a> : S3 









a 

Oc3^3d5 



S. 

s 
• p 



r>^ G 



a 
o 

N— ■ r- — 

^ =S *; S >- 

3 - 3 o O 



ao. ! 

p p i 

CO i 



2^5 



ojr^ o p i. 3 o o 



; g o ^ > c32 oj o 

(DCSt4c30o30o3 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas, 



11 



O OOOOOOQOOOOOOSOOOOO |0 Q'^OOOOO 
to i-oioooiooio— losoooo.-ooo o ooom — =; ; 



(N m -"J" t- » 00 >^ lO M •M ■* -f " o o o ■>! 3; t- 3 

t^ ■* >1 '^ ^^ T-H rr ^ ? -, -^ -, — — - 

JO r-l — 1 



> CO O S^ -M ■>! 00 



5<1 J .^ 



o i^o-i-Hrtoo — 



O OOOOQOOOOQ I O 

-• 0^3000000000 ^ 

lO O —^JZ ■-'^Zi X _ M -^ —^ p-<_ 

lO — "cOOQ 'TOO OOOSO-^ CO 

CO IN ^ 1-1 I- 



;^?? 



-< QOIOOCOOOO.QI^ f<M!NOO -^. 3»0'>)— lOi I O lO-fO -t--*< ^ 

CO TI> CO M IM . I CO ■* r^ 5<1 ^ CO .1 so 5<1 73 -^ 1^1 M •T CO !N H ■* :0 M -H -H 



OlOO— I 
00 05 -lO 
*! CO (N CO 
QO<N-t<^00 



(M>TM-H-M5<lTr'M:r00lO^H*-fM-H'^OCS 
--0-^1^:00005 OrfOS— OOlOl^*lOr:»<M 
(N 00 00 t^ -n; lO CO t-J^.-^-^^QO -n^ — ^-.T^CO JU^Oi "*,05 
O5C00S 05 -^O ^t^COt^io"io'cO'?TlQ'rHo6~or 



rt 00 X. 00 lO "» 5^ O 
^1 CO - 1- r 05 10 o 
S'l^ 00 00 "^00 -^5^c- 



1^ 05 T. M T: -^ji - ^ -T" I- I CO 
CO -^ CO -*< lO -r lO CO -* lO U3 



O ^-i>-*X00t- 00'* OS 
- M TH :? >l .. rH O - 00 

CO '"i^i'^i - -,x^ -^ia -^o 

"co co'od''^ 



so rH CO CO N Cl 



00 



Sooc- 
QQ' O 

o ooo 
oTsoioco 



SO2O00OO00O02O0OOO -. 
OOOQOOOOOOOOQOOOO -K 

i^t-ooooo-HOco— ocoo-*-^c;~ 



SOCOS'l^-nOlClCO'- 



- o - -H -o : 



500=000 

> 5 - o o CO o 



lO oooooooooo 

CO o-MOO-ro5S5o 

O rH - -r o— <_CO-.00 00 
o 00 o c't-T Tso otTx' CO 

r-<m ,' rl -K 

S-l 1-1 rt 



T-( -T so s r-< in 



•^CSQO so 
Tt*05l0--* 

ooioxrt_ 
lat^ 1-^00 



■* -^OilOSOX'^ I"-.Cf-<C0 35 -rCO--S-HXlOXO ICO O5O50C'^lCOi-'3S-l r- 5D05-Ht--05XX'iC0O 

©^ CO^HOCO"— l>>lC0pHr-4l— 1-HSll— l-H-HS^lr^i— (TJ* \ j-l S-IrHCOS-IS-JOM S-1 TTl-^-^Tt^Tr-^^lO-^f 



•* t^ "^ m -o f— o CO lO ^ in o CO o ^ 3: :D :d oi o i '-O 

■* <KS0^CO -iCO J-^500SO_050-<^lOCO--00_-i3 « -r I rH 

t-T -^^sS i-^so'tfooio't^'^'Truf'* OpH'*o 



'50 rH i-1t 



T-( so r-l 



go ■* o CO T' -- -^ 
00 >•) sj 05 so X CO 
I- X -^vi .^--^^ CO 



^ X TO ^ lO >> O S.1 - ;= -.o 

lO 'T'S-iQr-H— t^oso-:?co 

-^^^ :c_co cS ^«o TOCOin^x— ^ 

cT tjh"tJ^o^^ -^■-?C0 tjTiCoO 
O S'lr^COOSOt- lO 



OOQO 20000 00000 0=000 

oooooiOTS-ioxoooo =mco5o 
'-H^m i-^o o -^co rH -H_'* o "O -^^-j^o o CO o so 
t^o'so"cosfso~ - Trioco'-T -5 s-f -Ti^co so •o-h' 

COCOl- OrH-<}<[--'J"C03^S1S0 31f-lrtrt3'l.Q 



o o ^ in CO >J,"^ 
i-To: -Iso — rx'oo 



OSOOQQQOQOi' 

t— t^s-):Do-3»-r -H' 



s-i o CO 'c s; Ci in 05 SI : 



?oin X oco 



cocO'5'co^sococo^^co."'i-HCOso.im?oc'3 co m-^Triso-^so- 



-J5 00 ':' '^ >i 00 CO -:• — I 35 

tMCOS0CO'3>S0TS0S0 1< 



■«QoS 

coooco 

COpSOrH 



I— -H-^-sin^r03;-.C"-^-H -o.^-^ 'IX "■'^ 
'*xoocoo^'r^in-H05 0'M-*'Xino5s^i 
o . -^'j^T-Hr-^ j^o in-i^r-H03 o -.o ino^ci^ '~i.t^^ 
CO c»~-r^ sf CO «o -n~-TO-:^ o: -i^'co sico ^'t^i-^o 
TTcoco r-< rHS'isoin OT co^so lo 



■o '1' X X -f o -f 
-t" o I- 1- X — in 

l-;^35 -JlH^tO t- o o 

inco^ co-^-^ 
s-5 s-i in I- 



inco.-oino35 0505''i"-. 
•.c "-,05 J o ":: X CO - 00 
•■cj:-\ TO_co in CO ,.__ - in o 
5ox"t-^^oo"^'^-H"coo' 



X --I so X f-l «5 



SOOQOOO 
n o in o t- 00 
in >i^i- s-j^TO s] jo 

cT •.■^\_-^-»^£ x' 



—I ^ CO 



o oooooooooo 

o s-is-iino= -2200 

sq ioi--H^ox__ooooco-H 

-T d>ccS(^<o-£siS--o-S 

so rTiSOt^O-^O i-1!0 

•^ CO i-l r^ 



m in X to -3 o ■? 33 3 rH o ■* -ji 



CO cocoso^rsocococococococo>icococoincO"s« 



• o -r I in c-i 5>) CO c 05 r 



00 .'I -r in n - 



otio-^xomc' 



^cocoso .-os^icoinsoco 



in CO *3 
CO in so 



incooo 

•ix X 5 

in -a^COO 



X s^-xO'Hcoi~"nono-'2coo5o-:T'3-. om 



' so :o -^ -IT -^ : 



1 y3 (^ so CO o in 



o inin oint- 

^1 -.^ Xm so CO 

so -i'^t-THi.5 

i-ixo '.bTtit--iobh-ocin-OOTinoL--i>--r> Ico oTso t-Tc-roTor-*" 

in-VSO rH ^^S'l— I'l' -T CO -^ Or- rHrHin -T 



sono_ - , 

-_ .- -_- :cocooin-rxi— "x— in 

<l:-0irHO-H05-r-*nX MriMOiCOXX 



-S- 03 X -H ■*! CJ -r X «3 n 

■'J' -T J -f CO '.^ 00 3: in s>i 

X__0 O O ■* >!, ^5 -H CO S'l, 

co" n^int^oTco coco -^-^ 



ooooQoooooinoooQoooo i in ooooooo 

0300 ;eooo:-ooooinooo o oi^ot-ooo 

s^--^!^oo 'T 05^ .o^L- =^in ^ini--;^ooco -;^0'i^ -^ inin o c^G5^-^-T^ 

p-T -Tso't-Tsoco -r'f-^c-^'^i^^o'-* --Tincoco 3 1^ o oco -^^-iTcot^oo 

cococ- t--H''^cO'i<'^S'isiso05t— fi— ii-isoco o inino in^ 



OOQOOtKOQOO 



"so?2x— xininco 

1"S0 33X-* CO rHin 



SOrMSOO 



"I O"^0'n--oinooinoo'^'n--0'>isoco'^'3 50|t^ x— i-t<int-sox 

CO lii-3^-TC0»-('— (l— '#^'iT*C0"*-HC0'*OinS0t- ''J* CO'S'l^COO^S^'T 



■O C0-*'C0Xt-35C35r;S0-.O —I 

in L- in t— -# ^ in — X in ' ~ 



CO «o in CO 

«3 00 « 
05^ CO "^If?. 

osococo" 
i-H so 



OOO 3-HX>1TinS0X3:35 33535C-lCOrM 

» - ' --r^ CO in X — I in in so CO -H "; in -^ -t* 35 "5 so o 
SO^-l<^ -<_CO Oj^ -H^ ■■o.so_ 3-^so_ -r X^ O 00 t>; x__o jC l^ 

tD-ToT r^'so'-Ti-rTHsJx'inTfl'oo-J'oo'-.o'-* 
o'j3so 1-1 cosonxi in CO t- o 



CO — — I — ! 35 CO so T. 

C5 oosot--— i-rin 

X l--H-H^^p-<0 

— T 05 30 35 S-1 X t- ><< 

--( -^ >! t- X 



05 OS0X30-*O=>-f3;- 

..— cDOs-^ocorjcooso-H 

-*^ Xffi ^XrH 35^-;__,;_^-H-* 

sf S3C0«0O5D -in CO 00 -3 

SO SO-HCO ISOX X 



I '5 



o -^ •*! in 



:-1'n'0'^'ML— rti'-'inr3~CCOCO'r335 I t— osox -xt-o 

~5 1^ X c? -^ >i X >i o X o X _: o o CO in in -; o5 so x - in -3 

^-H t^in co^o ".o^o^co^ 3_r-4^!~^inoo t-^L- ^ co^ '-o^ ^ rj^co o5^ -^ -^ 

lns-f^^ inco !-^-f i-T-i^t^t^ --^wco'co.^'s-f -^ -hoc ^^os^fo x" 



--3 X 05 35 I— X : 



■M in \3 35 -H X "J" X o o -* 

X f— -HTt^L— "M - SO CO SO n 

— ^ CO '-c CO ^x_-^in ■;, -,x 

S'f OO >l'ct>.":-rcO-P~-)<^o' 

35 i-nnsooos-^in -H.- 



o 00— < t-omcoQ oi~ — CO -o t-— <oco 35 -r: X i — • si co 05 •m so — i -*• 

in 5ocosi>ncO"'*'i25"^-Hco-7''^cocOA?in-i'coin'^ coco-^in-rinn* 



-J" ossococo ■ 



<OC0OX35-HX I t- 



S -J-coco CO 



o— l-^CO 
X 35O5Q0 

•fl;.!-; L-;^co 
^osotTi-T 



Tt<rox-r— •05'--rXOOCOSO-J' .3XM-)<- 

in-Hcox--^ T-coin--35~int:-05^i-f-H-Hco 

i--f^-H inoo --H^.-i-oo .- . j^cooo^ooo^t-;,;-!, 

f-i inx'o coinco to-HO-r-rt-To's-foiroo'oror 



05 in-»<30 



1 -iji -H •* -H CO -.o 



-3 CO ~. O X ^ -H 

so 35 so - ,- in X 

oo^o -^TO^ -i^-^ji^in 
s;'~om"coinoir-*' 



X F-l -. X M - O O X SO T o 

CO iccoxoco ---^o Ic 

so_ 05i-,- - tc^o o;oo_ "5 3-^ co_ 

00 co-Ht-To •ono5r-r-*'in i-T 



in co3'i-*'inxcococ-io35X-*— i-fi— '— t—o-f 



*^i ■T' li^' JJ Ci" CTij .'it^^sjrj'^— ^T'"— -i- t— ' ' '^ I '** -V -'J *V *^ .'J 

-r CO in CO in Ti -f* -r CO CO -r ^ -r* in ■'S' CO CO '^ -^ coco-rmco 



CO CO CO so X O r- 



-H ici •ij' ri o -f' ^1 o 05 -*< so i t- 

rti 00 CO CO CO ■* CO •5' CO CO ^ CO 



-Mxinni-coososoo-oxox5 ■;!- 



1 o '■*' ;:c I- .n in ^ ■* in 



ko o in in ■■^ I— 



t— so - 05 '^3 -f in 
Tfi T in 53 in ?o ■'*' 



-H--l?3'Xin-H^C005'- 

inin^^j-^'ini^Tin 



in o i— "^ — ' -H in in - 1— -- 1 



-*— i-Hinm -l-r-l-5~. C0-JO5-PC005 

'^ CO ^ .M *■ I ^ so CO s-1 so CO CO .1 M So -H 



rH M X CO lO CO t- 



coiocot- 
roso co-^ 



o in — I r. - -^ — I ~ • 

SO-H— l-^SO-^SO— 'T 



88? 



fM X) :o ■^ : 

gS8S: 



) r^ so TO CO CO "O S-l S-l CO S^l SI CO CO ^I 

)00 -0000 0%-S5— oo 

. .O5J5,5 353;..05050535O5O5 



lOO— l-H — S-l—l-H-H-H— 4— l-H-H-H 

joop^ooo 00000350 



I ^ I SI so M n s^i 



; o = o o o c 



; 6od 

IS 03 03 X] 



W MO 

s as 

e go 

+; O o3 



loa 






fl • : : 
oa • ; 

_ O M o3 ^o 



50 



■35^^ S > S t > 3 g SS 5S ?i^ >c^ = 

o Slid £ «-s^^ o g .5 sg o o § .--r: *- 



JCaJiS— c3o>j 



S :•:;■: o 

*j a J a >, M a ^ „ 

:2i^M*-it-^t»— 1-^ 



Sa 
03 a 

P.QJ 

= J 



12 



•sa.iov 






•saiBa: 



•S8.I0V 



•ajoB 
jaj 



•sgiBg 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 



'^X :-00X 



oc^^soci FH-^i^cc-H^<n5^ 



oc iCCC':^xx:C00'M35050:'rL-o— '^f*. 



S — ic o -^ i~ -c o lo = c X 



• -^i (M W O »^1 T 5*1 L^ ^ "^ 



1 -M fM n-M 50 !M -^ 7<l 



— X'MM.--rsBt-Q0X2O-r;r^Ox-iri\;;» 



'OOOOQSOOOQOgOOOO 

>300QQ^c:oooo3'.Tc::oo 



loooooicoooo:;:;- 









tH — • OT 



.^ (M X I- •-; ir ri 5<) -( -H M x -^ ~. .-. ^ I- -^ — I :ro I- S c; -r X -»• 3: IS — ■ o ;r. t~ lo I -.-. ^-r a) 






•ajOB 



•sai^a 



•sajov 



•8J0« 



•saaov 



•ajoB 
jaj 



•sajBg 



•ajOB 
J ad 



■-"So — 






r-Tr-Tt-T 



JSg: 









<2 o 2 c o o o o o Q p 
^t^ ri ^ iO 7>1 lO o o o -^ 






_ ^. OT -^ X -^ -^ o o r-. 



CC?0CO — Ti^H^^O— T^M^— < 



= C lO Ci lO o 53 I - UT -M r-J 

in ■» i-H •* » - o — o w X' 

lO ■» l-;^>-l S^O rj M M O ^ 
1-h" i-HoTlOlsf tNO 



^— Oii^ — ~"C:00'^"— 
(Ni-H>r iO!M'— <OT cox" 






M ore 3SlO 



fiO:0 .SSCO^I^HCCCQIOCO 



I- o ~i -c •£ r; -H X X 



O'MOP'H— os'S'-^cc-r- 

lf7l05tOmX'*'-<0— " 
t^ t- >— t ^H Oi^ T^-";!^ -^ -M ^ - 



i-(rH.~'--*oomxo 

lO CC^in (^-^ t^-^ (M 35^ 



?SI5 



rtiC o 






f !N I -H r; C6 



NsOlO I »J 






mi— ^ 



OOP c p c; op - 



-. :COO^~tOQOCO 



'^ -.' :.; m L-- 5-1 -rr T-) -.o 



CTt-XC^O — ■MlClC — X 

■»rt^-»— ■-* :o;oooo 
LO i— X I— t If? 5*1 Oi "* rH O -r 



5<1— <OTO'*X—i— 'OSiOO 
go 31 .■ OJ L- -H ^ M TO 55 



(M ^^ OS i-H 5<l .-i — ' fH ; i-h ^h 



3COlCTOO-H5*)"-05^^Tt' 



^-^ -»00t-5SUS-H 



Tf< t— ■* 



- 31 O .- 1 -^ M 00 •* lO ■* 35 31 O 

00 o ^1 -H r r-i L- oi o .1 -; -^ 
lOXTCTOXxjj'i'M-i— ro 



-^ O -i 

o ao X 

.^ 25 TO 

-^ lO -T 



«;0Q5M-tOX5^5<1-hOO— • |(M 0000 



■^xTOO -mo-'XTO'tc-H 

~i _ TO TO C - O lO 5^ — I I- 'C TO 
TO 35 -r ^i X XL- TO — TO ■* lO O 
-T'^'t-^ TO r^i-TO 



2 P p I rH op 1< 



- O T" I TO ox 



TO I- 00 

TO 5>1^0J. :2 

X~ OQrH *J 






a* 

o cS 
C eS 

it 






•aSu 

-JOAV 



innui 



•uiniu 



0-H--0-r^HOTO:03S 
I.lTO'-<TO5*l!Ns5m<N 



in O I— r- TO ti •- t- 3J 5-1 t— 
INS<I^TOS|TOTO5^M5'1M 



lOO»aD5^3»-T^-*001-t-TO I 31 OTO 
5-1 TO TO -M 51 TO 5^ 5*1 iC? TO T-J TO TO 5-1 TO TO 



; ^S<>U3 5^OTM 



-. 31 Jl -^ — IC O •-! -.—• O 
TOTOTO"*TOiOiOTOTO-^-<t« 



O^lcia-rfTO^TOTOlS 



mp-f -•.^0O'-5pX'N=31 



3lM'T<'H-<5-<5-lTOS5 
0.-IOM-H— IrHi-H^ 



5<I31O-*lOg0 5t-TOOiO mOCO'Mt-TO^5'lt— ^H-C031|iO r-tt— 



I-(0-HP — OrHr-(^<.-<; 






•paanfut 
IS J f k 



•paisajuj 



S'dS 



i_22-a 









m^mMi%.t^^Mi:mumii 






^s^SSo^' 



O M _ 

mo 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 



13 



COOOOOQOOOOOQOOOOOOO O OOQOOOQOOO 

n 3>1 rH CO 



•j-^fflt- Ci>os^-^:ot-cooooi-oo-T-ocOr-i 



t- o cs .-. -I 



JOOOOOOOQO 



—I ^ tC 5^1 Ci 



-.J X ^ rt -T 0> 



■N'»COOT-H-5>-*JOmiO-l<00-rOT5DTI>.N-^»5-* 



^H -^ t--. rr t^ CO OS i-H n -t< lO 



?? s; 



^o-HXOO«^OTXoox-<T1> 
1 -^ CO rH 7-1 >j -^ cct eg CO CO f 



COOftCOTlOOOiOf-H — LOT"!::?— -COS^:^— -^^H 

O •* 33 l^ CO "M X S l~ rt 35 -r X -r t- Tl in ^. X' M 
'^USrHt^ (>J --CX "* CO ■^^00^X^0:0 f-1 X^T-«^lC 



tH *-H ^ 7-1 



coxo :oxxxs3co 

I- r-( T^ 03 CO - -M -T -o -y 
X •^__3-j_ .NOl X 3; i-l <>J,-!)^ 
SqCOCON lO i05-r 



?0 O^XQiO-g^'OCOCOCCS-tS-J-^ 

ff-1 I .^ X OO lO 1- r. o . I --rioco 

co^ iJ3_u3^-^C3 3irMC-i_5o 3:^:DX 3"- ".:? 

X* f-T-^^x 'j^^-n'io OiO '^UO-^ 

CO r-1rH>l rH 3-1 CO C-< tP 



0000=000 000 000 
•OOQOO.-OOOOOOOOO 
CO ^O O ■^'T OOO O O C lO o o 

s<ft— s^-K'T-riocoaft-^pin-f oio^ 
b-.3i Or-irt M 55nrt-<j< 



;ooooo: 



oooooooooooq: 
cooooooooos^oot 

.— OOOO-K MOrtiOO^t 



n (>1 r-t >1 ^ CO -^ 



O i-l -ji S-> X 



iOO'OOior^wrxoo 



lO W fH rH "^ 3i 



10 5-11035 1— OXOXXCOSS-J-iClO 
TT -^ S-1 -rf IQ -* lO li.) *-) L— •«# ri CO tH -^ 



!SS 



:^ CO CO lO 05 



^ coc5coc^coco65cocoo5cor3 5-i 



o!Mcocoff^X33!r»g5 



cS? 



coos-Tco 



S X lo o = I ■r — 2 ~ ^ '- ^' r:"" - 
" . I r~ c; cc 1 - y -H i5 1- ■ 



CO m c; — ' ' - o -^ ■ 



lO lO CO I— O -^ -M O X -^ 
W -M O •?• •- Si X O 3-. O 

o_c-i-!i^i- ^X X CO x^--;, 
lO-i'inc-T-^ ■* c/Tco 



O rtrH 



CO CO !- -r: X O IC X X CO 2 3-. X 

Xr-t-H^H^H^rHOCOlOXt-* 
X_-^0 31^5-> -H I- w^-; O -H t- e» 
^-T-^t-^rH 5-J :0 r4"c<riC IC t-To lO 



■-( S-l r-l 1-1 5 



-r :^ CO — ' 



r c;OQ 00 = 0000000 

5Dt-000 --OOQQOmOQ 
CO lO ...^rt lO o ■-? -^^^o O o_«o o >5 
G-Tt;^ ^rTo tjTg-J inTt-^io'^co^tD co^ 



1 1 -^ 3: O 



(N rtlNi— ICO 



ci 5 o o o 
looi— eOi-T 



CO r-(lO(N00 U3 IOl~-»-Ii-IC0C» 



COi-l^lO .OifNlOrHS-lir-lOXXt— --CXXT-l 



CO CO CO ■* CO M lO 



ex X t- -^ X X -M 

rS I— I ■* w t-i i^ 7-1 



s-» 5-1 -r X 5-1 o 

CO CO rH CO (M -^ 



3xin5D5-i5-ioaico-*'-iioc 

5 CO 00 *-l lO CO "^ 5-1 CO -^ -r lO --^ 



5-1 O 1- t- O X CO CO 5-1 3-. O ■* CO C 

1 - 1-- ffq 5< _ T CO 5-1 rH X -K t- SJ ; 



Tt^OCOi^^H 
O rH ii L- P 



t-x 

CO — 



5-1 X 5-1 CO lO t— lO 05 31 X — 3". CO lO 

8— i.H-^t-O-T-^X-l"I^C0-^.'3 

^ COrHXiHCOCDC-TlC -OlOl.— 0-H~ 



5-1 »H i-HCq 






pt-oooxSoc 

O lO O 1^^- - ■•9' 5-1 L 
W L— — CT 0"54" 5-r TlT 1 
O OJ X rt r-l S-l 



OOOOO 

»io iJ -^o 

L- 35 o :o 5-1 



o — o o o li '5 5 = o 5 5 CO o 

'^ CO^G-l^-Y^'^'-^^l^^'^i,^^ -i 

i-T cococo'o'o-^iOL-rt—cox'xo 

X >-l0 5^X lO iat--t-H — M05 



r— lOcoxioocox-^ 



X m o CO X ■» •* p CO 1- 

-nricCS-l — ■* — 5l — CO 



-T-cO'-it— 5-ia cocO"T-oio<x-r 

COC0CO5-llC5-15^5-l'MCOCOC0CO 



CO-HOCOOXOt-I-15-lXCO^O 

I. t-L-TiiOr-^ooooxcocooo 

■* & TI< ffl^Ci 5^tO_S5 O ■* l£?^X_^IX_3a 



<M Tf O -^ --^ 

'J' -O rH O CO 

in-*^5-^.i^x 



F-l :05X 



lO 01010000C0 5-1---TXIO— ' 

no O -^ .-I -r ^H O O I— L— 3. I— ( X -r 

:c^ CO lO iC cC_3i ^ .-l^T)^ CO^L— "^t- ^ 

t-T ■"d^-.^t-r— "^rio'-Tcox -^co ^i-T 

5-1 r-Hfi-lT— t^-Hi— 1 i-(CO 



Sooo 
O — TP 

■^_coco o 



opooooooo^oppo 
oiooo^iio- — looooo 
o I- L- =^— o 5-1 o CO -H o :; I- 1^ 

5-1 X r-To^rJc-r-T-Hlffco'p'^^ 



X 1—1 S<1 rH — r-150 



g^gss 



CD 1-It 



o opinpoioooopoop 

I- ^ o 3i o I - 51 J .; o o -; ■^' o 

■^ O^IO I— 00 lO t-^t^O — O O -H o 

■^ C0'x^NCDl03-rrr"l-OC-ri,-xp 



5-1 CO Oi t- : ^ 05 O 5-1 



ICOOSb- 



< CO o M o I- -j; CO c 



co-T-rt^iot^cox-^coxiocOTOc 



OX— 15^ CO 
t-rtXmo 



r-t CO lo Tt« t- CO -^ T-1 >— I KO X lO t— CO 

t- C»5 CO CO CO '<S' -^ CO CO CO -w ^ -^ 



rriJ-O'^-t-00-*05OC0XCOX3S 
C0050C5L— -^CO^H^H lOt-CD5-l 

"H o CO I— CO rH Oi^x i— 05, - l— CO_CO 
00 -^ sTco^t-^r-rxs^oTod-^o" 



G^l--^0 - 

CO --H iCt—CO 

Ml-Tc-frHr-T 



i^O 
UO J 

cioo 



"^ c; CO o 'H c-1 -o CO CO •/: :r .r o 35 

L- rH— •— *^^H-". 05-100X5^— <-T 

I— lOO xco^-r^roioaooi-co >i^io 

10 ■<j!'ot-roorri-H^t-rioioi-oo5i 

■* 5-^^.^^5^r-l<M — -3- 



35 3: 5-1 O 



05 05 CO C5 35 10 ■* O O-l I- CO 

-_ CO -^ .1 WO" 



X r-l 5-1 1—1 r-l r-l 5<1 



r-l CO ^"0X5^ 

CO X CO X .. -If 

■^ -^^co^oTs^ 

10 r-lr-l 



rHXCOO 
O' 35 ^. 00 
L- CO 5^ CO 



10 C; X IC L— I- 1 . CO IQ 5^ O — I-T X 

co_ o_^r^__,-j_o,io^coia ,'i_— irx — o 

x" s-i'cox'c-fiio't-r -jTi^ro-T-'oo T" 

-^ rHlOi-lt- ■* lOt-r-lrlO^X 



r-1 lO O 5-1 5-1 3: t- 5^ -H CO 35 
C0COTtiC05-llN3<<71r-<5MrM 



0535CD511O :C0 10X35 
5-1 — ■ -^ CO X : 5-1 5-1 rH CO 



1- rH X 5^11- 5-1 34 05 wo X CO 
5-1 CO 5^ 00 5-1 00 -T 5-1 *-l CO CO CO CO CO 



10 3; t-h- 
Tj- X 35 T)< 

coot- 

rHx'cO 



-f -^ [— 05 05 CO 3; O r- 1 O 10 

cooioxi-rH35o<i— inx 

00_r-J_01^CC X 35 00-^10 
CO'OO-'P '^ COCOr-HCo' 



«Ot-l— OX35-S"05lOCOa<<-*05Q 
CO CO 5^ -^r ■?! 5-1 ■* 5^ C-1 5-1 CO CO ONI 3 



coocoxt; r'xiox 

O » X _. CO : 3<< „ .. , I 

5-|U3CO_l— CO :i£0 rH^lO 
rHG^^CO 



U? TOC^^^C-^-l'-l'rH .05_X)0> 

35^ OOCO^rHCO X^ 000 35^5-1 5^ 1—1 CO X 
X CO lO CO 05 r-l 3; r-i co"— ^ TJ^CO -^ ":3* 



rH —5-1 



cot— r-o 



l-00eO'*iCOt-t-5<lQ 5^ 5-l-*Xr-l35COlOCOCOI-rHrHCO 

5<i55conc0 5-is^eoco co ■fl<coo5cooocococococoio-q<co 



1—I00r-0 35X(MOXIOCOI— r-t 

-rifClOlC'^'COiO'rio^iOiO-^ 



OOrH-S^OO 5-1X5-1; 

coiococco-::co-Ti 



)iO 



51 X t— O X CO CO 10 O O CO 35 O X 
10 L— -^-fCO'^-f-T-T-T-^COCOTP 



lOa^rH35 .-^COX-*-*35t— Xt--S^C0rH'^O 
rrr-i5^0 : rH rH rH 5^ rr rH cO O O r-t r-l rH rH CO 



CO 35 XlOXrHl-lOCO'O It— lOrH 35 OXQUO-O lOl— ITCO "5 
r^ 'rti ^ r^ -1 T-i r-{ r-^ '-i f-'l r-t \ rH 5-1 (51 rH 5-1 5-1 ^ 5-1 5-1 >1 5-1 CO CO <N 






■^S j2 :; co~MM CO CO -^col 
ogooppopoo< 

.3535,.350350505-.35. 



icOcS 






„_ Jas3 X c3? 
O O O O 1' ® '^ 



— Z^iQ 

2 » c3 

-3 C 75 



O 0) 



3D 5 0-^ Si 



cj to 

O is S 



: Q? : : ® 



5oOOOHWW^sllSi(§l|g^tf 



■ en ' 5 c3 d 3 ^ 'O 

o csu:;; '^•^ <aS o ^ > 



03 G^ sh » 



3-0 ? H a! 
§ S3 J' 83 3 



o3 dx: a 

OQOQXCC 



14 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 



o 



1^ 



o 


1 

1 

•sajov 1 


OOOOOOOO^pOQOCOQOOCiOOOSO 

§ii5gii5S§gg85Si^S?.^sB?,S 
S ?rs S S S o' Lf il ?i d S |S i?:s g g§ fe =^ !5 § S 


5. 


•a.iou 


SS?S^gSStSSgSS^^^i5E;S^i5SS 


in 




•sai^a 




1 


i 


•sa.TOV 


§ii§iiiiip^iiii§2i§i|l|ii 




.T8<I 


ss^5fs^?3^5^;^s^'$?js'?s^5HS 


■^ 


•sai-Bg 


g '""S ^'S S 2' g 5'*- g g S'i? "^'^^'^ g? 2 S S 3 §3 S 


i 


.iartaSt3.iaAV 1 


M M M ! M M M ■ M M 


■* 


1 


•S8.I0V 


g8S8S8?8??S8S?S8SSS3SS8'^ 

(--Tr^'Trs^-; f4rH"^CC'Q OT .- (N -X lOi-H O' - o«o ^' 2 o cf 


o 


jaj 


.-l-rKIT>X-H^><-MOOTlOi-OXTmiOlOI-»M0CX 


o 


•saiBa 


-t -C t- -K -N -N -^ -H O - ir- I- ^^ C5 05 -N r^ -K -^ O X - rr t- 


in 


o 


•sajov 


I5lil^iis5isi||si||gii§i 


o 


•a.TDT3 
.18 J 


OTOTM^OT^JlO^^Min^ThCCtNMCT-^OT-^MOTMIN 


^ 


•saiua 


S^'2 8 2'S S3 « S ^&S 3 g -" "^^ ■= iS 25^ 2^ i^ r- 3 


CO 


rH 


•soaov 


SS^S8SS888°88388S88S^SSs 


1 

X 


•8.10B 


!5BSsSE:g8°S!SSSgSS°SgSgf2S^gS 


!0 




•sai^a 


t- -n r: »i -. o X 'N !- o o X ON lo ceo •- p 53 X t:; "; ;- 1- 

S?.S':Sd:coooi;2^^:;:;;SoS?!?Sxxi??=§ 


o 

s 


1 


•S8.10V 


S; -r (M -<• ^. c; -.-1 !- o ■-- o — M -.<N -; -;,in x_,ii3 r;X os^— 


o 




^§8?;^S^.gg?S^g???§S?5Sg3SM5g?^^ 


So 


•saiBa 




U3 


i 


•a St? 

-J8AV 


^§S^S^^§!5S!g^^^SSSS^fe^??5S 


CO 




•lumu 


S'5g?S^^gSSg5£^^SSSSgS2S?^:?.S 


ia 




•niniu 
-luiK 


SSgggSS.gSSSSSSS^fjS^SSSrjS^S 


85 


•pajntui 
as Ji ji 


I M N M ii M ! M ; 1 \ 




•pa^sejui 


ii ill III ll il 1 i ii ill 






a 

3 

o 
o 


M M M M M M ! i 

IHMMMMMM ^ += 
1 ^ ■ ! MJ UJags Mfi„ ll^ ^1 


"3 

1 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Ceop of Texas. 



15 





i 


■<ifi.jOY 

1 


ic j: ; t r: ic -; :t -r -h — ^oo O 

J^ ~ T- S - ■/. ' ■ 1-' It; !>i A !N 
^ (M y: -|« I- ut vr ■c X l-H 






•a.Ton j-M 


O (M ^^ ** S^l 5C t^ -^ 05 ^H CO 






•saitsg 


---■r^T--r:-jrTH05iciccoiO 

■-I sJ^rr MM C,X CC OC 00 M L- 

^oT'N ■?■{ o - --< -*< r ic CD'S 

CO i.r I OT OT rH =: ic — OS 

71 T*H -^ -r -M r: ■?. OT 


o 

-1 


1 


•sa.iov 


|§gSgSgOTg|?l§ 

i-Tco rT-T OT'tM' t'— M OTi-^ 
t^-cio — c:-tot — a-oio— ( 

^H 7-l-X OT Tp L^ u^ -r 1^2 -.^ ^^ 


c\ 


•3.1013 .HM 


-7-1 00 ""■ ~" t* 1 ^ "^ ' •— ' <N ^ L'- 










•saiug 


S'^S--?SS^?:i?OTx ; 

^ -S" — -H OT OT 1 - l- .. O -T ■ 




aj 


OT OT -i OT ^ -i rt OT 


o 

_) 

o 


t 


•sa.iov 






00 


•a.ioB .laj 


I&^SS^Sot^^IS?^ . 


— 




•sa[ua 


^ r. OT S Tf 00 OT OT ■£> 1 - O 
OT -T OT X 1 - OS 00 -r 1- X O 


o 


•s.iuaA' gi .loj 
8.101? .lad aSBjaAV 


:;] ; ; M !?o:?S??OT 


< 

u 
<u 

Pm 


1 


•sa.Tov 


00 ^ .;iJ r^in cr^OT^ .^x 1^ 

C: T-H -H -^ -i^ O • -^ • '*" X*" t-^ -h" 
5- v: ^ ■ IC OT -; OT OT 1- OT X 
i-t OT Ci OT^"^ l^ ^ — ^"^ '-^ 






•ajOB .laj 


^S5SSotot^.=?ot^ot 




•4-> 
O 

O 


•saiTjg 


00 Ci ^ >1.lO S'l t-^ -r^l^^X^-^ 
OT'T^OTrt-^-"-' 


- 


^ 


•sa.jov 


IC'SDO r^ OOT ICOTOIQ -)^ 
lOl-lO C: 1 ri-l^OTOTOT-r 

^ ^- — - 05 X — 1 X ^- -^ O 

»-« OT C5 OT OT ■■— IC -r^'^US 


PL, 

oT 


•a.iOTJ .Taj 


O -< — 1 1- -r -H O -^ I- OT tH 






•saiBa 


Xri-^OT05lO*iQOT3i-<J* 
O lO lO -. 1 ■ Ol ^ U5 OT "*! l- 

00 ■*-"■' -^OT -i l^x'-X-'lO 




o 

e 

l-H 


35 


•sajov 


x205;-^i2g5--OT 
if: ^ X M^-H -H T i^OT_ B t- _; 
usmxcr. 05OT--'HOTioo 

rH OT 3-. OT_OT L- ■«■ UV^^-^ u^ 




'ajou jaj 


t-— -^ — *— < OT l^ t"* t* ^1 *~ ^^ 
OT OT. lO ^ ^ M CO OT OT OT_ OT 




•saiBa 


T-r?. r4 lO X L- ^ OTOT - X" 

■o 'o 5 rs 2 'otU^c ='::;'-' 


L 




s a I B q a3B.i8Av 


^r)<-:?M<^MCOOT<NCOeO 










ID 

d 

o 
O 

o 

w 

s 




^ :M ■ : : ^ • • i ■ 

H^S^i^ M i M 

a=.<a«H :ot?^ iSi 

eoPS2pOTS2?i| 

O O » i tu '^^Sy^>9.r 


i 



16 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 



(4 



88 8 









CO a; 



i^ 



-v,' O) 00 



-r"^ 






so 



felO 



Op 



CO 

3 & 






§ 5 <". 






85^- 



C3 

5 « 



^ 



COO 

«o 



OJ y o 



-, t- j; — en en 

S o2 OS ij 



So^ 



a o 
30 







® 



0) 03 « O' 

oH - o 
"" o <s 

^* r^ Ui 

o3 2 a> 

S tn • 
■O O O 



=3 8 






"J O !h te 

o a; ?' S 



:d <1 



C 03 



O "^ 



bD 



^ bC-rt 1^ 
OJ d S r< 
bDOj hog 

S ca OS'S 



0-. 3C a _■ 



c 




en 


03 







3 





S D lac 


1— ' 


M 


y-c 







d 


bc2 













-M 


® 


n 















:. 


® 


0^ 


< 




*j 


;j. 


" 





o aS ?i 



j; '-' », -* 






Oj en 




-^ 


30 O'O 




p 


2 '^^ 




•0 


- 




■o 


?-^ 




03 


•■"•a M 




^01 Q 








03 


^ao 




is- 


2Sa6 




s^°^- 






4^WM 




03 


aCo aj 










o3 a 


0) 








".2'^ 








03 


" 


3 y'-^' 


s 






z 

u 






t>^ 


ca c 


0) 








^51 




a 






u 




lv.00 c 
acrca 
ted fo 
eason 


■3 


5- 


aoo 


h 


at. i ^ 


0) 







.^■■^^■■< \ 



I , I WICHITA I '( /■'^^, , rV /"' 

L-..,.r— -4-— -| I I -J 

"•-^'""lARCHEBl 



uii(iyl nSHER I joKts JsHiaiifoiio' iTtMiEniJHLOwto. P»R^^" ITaRRakt | oa 



,X!co.,.!"o.fo.,..!r-^|!cA.3. 

■~ri !"" i .Mir.;' »ooo ' „W'*'<'<""_i 



no<TAitii jmTCNfa 

s 



1 — V 






COKE jbunnels; 



TATL«« I CAa«H»N| EASTtAND^' V^; ^^^v 

• ! _,'^^ ERATH ^■^'■-^f^,^ \. 

I I VconAncN^, 



iBioN I CONCHO \(<C«^\ l>S/r \CVntlra\. / Z.....yi^ > |z \ 

I I MASON I LLANO I /wiiitANS0N~.. ^ffKBw* V 5 Tv ' '^iV^Ar ^f rVVi I I 



LtE 

^Xnv y^ vC 'VV'W-vNsi'v,')!. iiv ha r r i s 

. " "wH^RteNXaJ^ORlA, 




LHAflOH 



^ 



= 6outlvcrtv trrou]} B 
Ccx\Xta\ " n 



'' ' i ■-- 

' JFOABDJ 



,/v'-^-i: 



I--— r-'-|-— i Lr/>eJEivCooKE cmsc^irANNiNl _ I ■ ^„,„ , 

I . K.r i KNOX Jb^'-OR' rchErI ( |^^ t .--rt>Sht&-^,TT-~K;V -^.'-l 

I— "tf-T'"" A:";Lck"' W.se !0EKLicoUUHiHUNTrMOPK.5^|^.O|. , 

l5TDNewi)HASKELL?>IMaM0«™<>WJ"G JACK. WISE \- L.^ ' "-^V";----^ 

r,5„tRi.0HEsUEi™Fd.5rePHENiPAT;;^^ 

.1 — „r,T»ii«uaNlESTLAMOx' • ll ^- • -^ \ _.--S 1 «-\ -'v 

• „' -s "• 



I i \ y \ y \ " \NAVARRO W- ptflOKCtv.-; ^ SHELBV \ 



TOM 



i i.. T X._ 



6FEEKI JCONCHC^ 



I "i-f— -• - -A '^- ^ 

jOUICHEK; MENARD; ~\ ^BURNES^ ---^^ MIL 
! • maWlLAN0( £A/iaiAM50N^ 



Am\ / '-'^ ^ALKERlW \ •,■»«• 



Wi 



lv 



;^ „ _] "^^"^"^ pUNc/ 

; — - — • '• <HAVS" 

■ .. •■•-'. KERR JKENOAUV \ 

•.;«©WAR05 »-~^— ^-^j /coma 

\ BAN OE RA *■ y:..r^~:ly^- 



■VIS 



. LEE 



-V'^: 



\ .<A 



:x;Aiowrt> 



'vAUSTINMA H ARRIS _r^gp^ *y 



. ^CpLOB 



N2ALES'^^^^ 



~1 FORTE 



4' ^v<^^V::^::■•>ioi^'' ^«'*?^^maV4 t):hO A 



I 7AVALLA4 

L-_\ 



r^ IVviv ■ yKABNE&>- "''>^ 

*( rbio i;Af4^'.<'S*.>',. ,:.:---*^ i' 

\ I. ■■■»r;."; ■■ V.' -;>•;•'" -'^cnl lAO . 



■VICTORIA > 






I :■ 

^ ' STARR A:-.r.-l :•;:•; 



■^*/:' 



r 



'^-' 



: FOARD : !_ . ?.*''^ 




i ^' i ! VHODOjeK 



JOHNSON! EU 



_. Vm.th f/ihlli-^H 

TAVLOR'mAHAN jtASTLANJ^i^^^^^ "'^J^^'A \L*-"Nj'''«"5<''*>-~i„S^;f*»»''*l 

60NCHOI I \^-^ \CORYEtL^. ^' I \^^- « f 

\>^m.\SX.W 5^NSAB^LAMPASAS\ ^/ ^ yal»* -' » 



MtNARDj j 



JBURNET/ 



BELL '^^' VOMTOi 
>/ MILAM 



•^--, '^ 



/ r«> WALKER' ^•'^ ■ ■»--»-- 



! ** I' 
■--•^-tMASONiLLANO( AVILIIAMSONX ^X^^^^^KjfH S 'J's. J -^ 



KIMBLE 










5 VX-^|f^™^J 



•LA SALLE lyPMUtl 



MPATA 



STARR ; 
/ / 



I !ro«»"l l*"*^"""*! \y^- 






'-l/"r 



.'(.. 






IN« f" 



.._.t_t<c_ j.j::nj_ — ^ — ^ — '7~T''r — '■f 



OOKE ICRAVSONtfANNIN | 



HUNT;HOnmtt is !"!•'!«! ca«» 



fISHW i JQNE5 jSNWtlWrtiTBWW^WLOPmj^RKERlTAIlWN-HwLLAS in^„p_J^gg^y^^--.i.^-^lHAM»Ol» J 



U._; 1— 






! \hooo;johnjoni tLua V- — ••»-• — — > r ~ 







' L ~-l WICHITA I / ... ^ r- /-. JV.y •-* . 

4.._.JL._._. i- |C^*v| I (/', V- , ! ^l^^^lBtomvERT--.^ 

•«.ur 1 KNOxjiJ^'-'"' APCHEfl : r^^ .^■~---l -BOWIE 

i«'No , _^-ri^ ;^ ._L._.i J_.-\.V---^---''1""^'^''~'Tifr^'-"'' 

NOiOACK|WI5e jOEN^ COU.N|H0HT.^^ ll|^,;_^ _ __| 

Jnu^TQPARKERiTARMNTl DALLAS r _...L 7^1^ "--•-'«-~/"'''l'^'''''^°'*'l 

V v5MrTHr _-^ ' 



jiTONEttWL|>a5KfLL(THR0tH»0RJ 
n JHER i JONfslsHACKElfOBllsTlPHEN^BMOPNjQPARKER ItARMNtI DALLAS 

; j < I i .pn^-ri — -' ^ 

ill ! \hoodijohnson:ev.l'i5 

NOLAN |TAYLOR|MLL*HA^^tASTlAN^^^ ERATH^t^i 

,i ,i T-i--<^' \ '^ 

COKE-BUNNElS'l I „ \ Sf ^\^°^<^^^ \^' ''. ^r.^,.-.^.v 



'V.KAvABRc>:l;t 



1 iPANOLA- 
Irusk: I 

. L, ^^ 

3lM0r\rf^- — i^SHaSV, 






GREEm! CONCHO 



yl \COBYEl. 



BPAbHV 



iM'CULLdtl) 5AN5A&*.A 

iCmtltHfUMENARDl . IbURNET'.': 
j MA50N -LLA 

! '_ J.—- ^ 

^^"''"^ I MM OLE T T 
I I \ GILLESPIE 



J'^. ..vA.urtf r^A -■ \ ■•..•>. ■■-.•'.■1. -15 U' 
•^v.■•^■ ■■• ■■••V<-^3URus«JfAv''y'l-\ '■;■:■■■•■.■. '^^^^ i i j 



, ^ GILLESPIE lBLANCy^^;^^^p^v-^M^;iv^^ V,: / 

V Si l/AV/HLLA I FRIO IAtAsCOSAS. X (VICJOKlAV;.v'-.n;- >7'.-:t 



CDV/ARDS L 



M;fe.<'P.f 



S. I/AV/ALLA I 

vi L .j_ 



\\ I 






NA/E BB 



•DUVAL 1 NUECE: 



i /90d. 



I 



Vzapata/ 

1 

I 



/ i 



!\ 



-r— -1 



I ! FOARD, ; IcLAY: ■ '. i>^ 






iCLAYJ 

iKiNG!p::iii*-pv . ', I yf_.L|._Y'-t- — '( 



'**'T>sr-. i '.BOWIE \ 



"1 1 I X • /l , I OENroNl COLLIN 1"*"^^ iwK ISnL \ 

NOLAN ;taylorIcallahan!e/^n^' ERATHS^>i«v'^'^\ /'•'^^'i^^-l^'-^^^^i^^/l^y-^^ 

■• — r r r\c 

r.nKE'RUNNElS', _. ,'„„,,„m 



COKE!RUNNElV|^^j^,',BP, 




_! ""•.•^r-v 



i LAMAR 'isjj,,,^.')'- 



•*^"'' 'archer "'"•^'^iHC^ i ^-^-7.-^1 ! nw.c 

I *— -. I 1. u£^._.L, — \ % f L^*^ I •- r • 

i — H 1 /, ' \ I • mi mt.wopSihii I /'"**'«• t*»» ; 



^"^ NAVARRO 



•'PANOl 
■"• J '■ ^ 



^,-' \rRjt5T0NE 
LmtsiON^ 



lcoMA«A, 

1 /<J7 /' \ [t^-r "fCi ^oiK Uvas^'- 

BuRNtr/ /••~N/ MILAM \/ I o WALKER , t,»s7 \ 1 

I ' • S ^-T^SATod ■» >^ 1 ■^A^ v.*-.— 



jtnldCHfR 



iuriON 



--i,-.J.. 

MENARP j 

-; MASON 



KIMBLE I 



_ 1 6iU 



5P'E XlaNC 



rowA 




i,Ll8£ 



m I"! • 



iZf 






\. ' STARR X I 

^; / A ! 

/HlD4^60icAMi 
/ 




Boll Weevil and Cotton" Crop of Texas. 



17 



TABLE V. 

COMPARISON OF ESTIMATES IN ACREAGE IN PERCENTAGE OF LAST YEAR. 





Galveston- 
Dallas 

News. 


Houston 
Post. 


Ft. W. & 
R. G. R. R. 


Writer's. 


U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 


Year. 


State 
Agenc. 


Planted. 


Plcked.t 


1900 


97.2 
107.1 
98.1 

91.4 
109.32 


93 

Slight" 

decrease. 
105 


89.14 
128.52 


97.9 
10«5.3 
100. 

99.8 
105 




108 
110 
103 

101.5 
107.1 


(108) 


1901 




(106.6) 


1902 




( 99.8) 


1903 
1904 


la5 

H. &T. 0. 

R. R. 

106 


94. * 
105.3* 


[103.9] 
[105.5] 



* Average of all reports coming to State Statistical Agent, 
t Computed by writer as shown in Table IV. 

I'or Texas there was added to the estimate of December, 1900, of 
acreage picked 137,915 acres in making the final estimate of 7,178,915, 
w]iich represents 2 per cent of the 8 per cent increase. Witliout this 
addition, which would be the December, 1900, estimate of 7,041,000 
acres, the Department would have shown an increase of but 1.1 per 
cent over the acreage of the census for 1899, though 6 per cent over its 
own estimate for 1899. These final estimates of the Department were 
not published, however, until June, 1904. 

From a careful study of all the reports available we fail to find 
any reason for estimating an increased acreage in Texas in 1900. 
In addition to the reports of the News and Post, the writer has used 
in his estimate for this year reports from all agents of the Missouri, 
Kansas and Texas Eailroad, Cotton Belt and Fort Worth and Eio 
(Irande Eailroad. The report of the latter road shows a marked de- 
crease for Northwest Texas and both of the papers agree in a decided 
decrease. During the summer of 1899 the Brazos valley suffered from 
two unparalleled" floods, which, according to investigation of the De- 
partment of Agriculture (Circular 10 Div. Statistics), damaged 339,000 
acres of cotton. Undoubtedly a large portion of this acreage was un- 
planted in 1900 and our estimate shows a decrease of 177,894 acres 
in Central Groups A, B, C, and E in 1900. In addition the North- 
eastern — the largest — Northwestern and Southwestern groups showed a 
decrease while the increase in the remainder of the State amounted to 
but 76,241 acres. A difference of 365,343 acres arises between our 
estimates and those of the Department for 1900. 

In 1901 we estimate an increase of 6.3 per cent over 1900, being but 
3-10 of one per cent less than that given for the Department in its 
final acreage picked. It may be well to here call attention to the dif- 
ference in the estimates of the Department of Agriculture given out 
in June and December and the final estimate. The June estimate is 
of acres planted and is based on schedules returned the last week in 
May. It gives the percentage of the area planted the previous year 
for each State and the United States and an estimate of the total acres 



18 Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 

for the United States. In 1901 only was an estimate published for 
each State, and the June estimate of the previous year given in acres. 
(See Table IV.) In December an- estimate has usually been published 
of the number of abandoned acres, the percentage abandoned of acres 
planted, and the number of acres picked and to be picked. This was 
given by States in 1900, but since then only for the total United States. 
The final estimates of acreage for 1899 to 1902 were published in 
June, 1904, and though no statement is so made, doubtless represent 
the acreage picked, as they are uniformly less than the June estimates, 
except for 1900 accounted for above. Since 1902 no final estimates 
have been published and the final acreage picked in Texas can only 
be estimated for Texas as in Table IV, by assuming the same per- 
centage abandoned in it as for the total IJnited States. The difference 
in these estimates is important in any statistics dealing with the yield 
per acre of the cotton crop. For instance the Manual of S<"atistics 
and Stock Exchange Handbook for 1905 gives the acreage as shown 
in Table IV, crediting it to the estimates of the United States De- 
partment of Agriculture. Evidently the June estimates were used 
and those for Texas for 1902, 1903, and 1904 somewhat modified. If 
these figures based on the Department's June estimate are used the 
yield per acre will be much smaller than that later published by the 
Department, and indeed than should be fairly used. The reports from 
which the writer's estimates are made were usually made the second 
week in June, though some later, even into July, except in 1903 and 
1904, in which years the reports of the aids of the State Statistical 
Agent of the Department of Agriculture made May 25 were also used. 
Our estimates should, therefore, be somewhat less than those of June 
by the Department, and might be slightly more than its December 
estimate, but are found to be lower than the latter in 1900 and 1903 
and closely approximating the final estimate (line 7, Table IV) of 
increased acreage over the final estimate of the previous year as com- 
puted in Table IV. In 1901 an increase was shown in all groups of 
counties except Central Group AB, which was seriously injured by the 
Galveston storm and boll M-eevil in 1900. 

The total acreage for 1902 is estimated as the same as that fon 
1901. Southern Groups A and B, Central Group E, the Xorthwestern 
and Southwestern counties, showed some increase, while the balance of 
the State showed an equal decrease. The June estimate of the De- 
partment gives an increase of 3 per cent over 1901. In the June Crop 
Ec^porter for 1902 it is stated that the acreage estimated then for the 
United States was based upon that of 1901 plus 418.000 acres added 
to make it better agree with the census report (publish':>d in 1902). 
Of- the discrepancy between the acreage of the Census and Department 
in 1899, the Texas acreage comprised 42 per cent. If this 418,000 
acres added to 1901 before estimating 1902 were evenly distributed 
between the States according to the actual discrepancy of 1899, then 
175,560 acres would have been added to Texas, which would represent 
2.3 per cent of the increase estimated for that year, leaving the increase 
at 0.7 per cent, but little above that of the writer. The final estimate 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 19 

of acreage for this year as given by the Department in 1904 was but 
99.8 per cent of 1901, practically the same as our estimate. 

The acreage continued to remain practically the same in 1903, being 
99.8 per cent of 1902. The summer of 1902 witnessed another serious 
flood of the Brazos and an increased area injured by the boll weevil, 
which resulted in a continuance of the decrease of acreage in the 
central counties. The Central groups and Southern Group B showed 
a decrease of 4.3 per cent from 1902, while the balance of the State 
showed an increase of 2.5 per cent. In addition to the News and 
Post, reports from the Houston East and West Texas Eailroad, Houston 
and Texas Central Eailroad and Fort Worth and Eio Grande Eailroad, 
were consulted, reports being given from each agent of these roads. 
The average of 584 reports received by the State Statistical Agent of 
the United States Department of Agriculhire from railroads, oil mills, 
and aids, was practically 94 per cent of the 1902 acreage. No final 
report has yet been made by the Department. 

Assuming the abandoned acreage to have been the same as for the 
United States, the picked acreage would have been 3.9 per cent greater 
than the final acreage of 1902 (See Table IV, line 7), but probably 
the abandoned acreage in Texas was above the average, and it is possible 
that the final figures of the Department will show but little increase 
over the acreage picked in 1902. 

The high prices of the fall of 1903 induced a considerable increase 
of acreage in 1904 in many parts of the State, making a to+al of 360,760 
acres or 5 per cent above that of 1903. Central Groups C and Df 
which had been very seriously injured by the boll weevil and boll worm 
in 1903 decreased their acreage 2.2 per cent. The remainder of the 
State increased; Central Group AB, 2.4 per cent, Southern Group B 
about the same, the Southwestern, Southern A, Eastern and North- 
eastern a total of 4.6 per cent, while the Nor+hwestern and Western 
increased 16 per cent over 1903. The June estimate of the Department 
of Agriculture gave an increase of 7.1 per cent. If the per cent of the 
planted acreage abandoned in Texas in 1903 and 1904 be considered 
the same as for the total United States, then the picked acreage for 
1904, computed upon this basis, would be but 5.5 per cent greater than 
the picked acreage so computed for 1903. Our estimate agrees almost 
exactly with the average of the reports made to the State Statistical 
Agent, which was 5.3 per cent increase. This includes, however, re- 
ports not arranged by counties from oil mills and railroads and recog- 
nized no decrease in any section of the State, where we have ind^ca+ed 
a slight decrease in Central Groups C and D, almost exactly amounting 
to the difference in the two estimates of 0.3 per cent. Our estim.ates 
included reports from all agents of Gulf, Colorado and Santa Fe Eail- 
road, Fort Worth and Eio Grande Eailroad and estimate of Houston 
and Texas Central Eailroad. 

Comparing the total acreage of .1904 with that given by the census 
for 1899, there is an increase of 9 per cent for the State. This state- 
ment is, however, quite misleading. The northwestern and western 
counties increased 51 per cent in this time and all of the counties un- 



20 Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop or Texas. 

injured by the boll weevil in 1903 (140) increased 23 per cent, while 
the 40 counties injured by the boll weevil in 1903, in 1904 had decreased 
over 7 per cent from 1899 and comprised 41 per cent of the total 
acreage of the State. 

Against this the June, 1904, estimate of the Department of Agri- 
culture would show an increase of 28 per cent over 1899 and the 
computed picked acreage for 1904 would be an increase of 22 per cent 
over 1899. The June estimate of the Department for 1904 is 1,085,529 
acres more than that of the writer and the computed picked acreage 
based upon this is 625,736 acres more. It would seem that the De- 
partment's June estimate is probably 700,000 or 800,000 acres too 
large, and that the acreage picked computed on the basis of the June 
estimate and percentage abandoned is at least 500,000 acres too large 
since June, 1903. Undoubtedly this is to be mostly accounted for by 
a failure to recognize the decreased acreage of the counties badly injured 
by the boll weevil and floods in Central Texas, as well as to a lack of 
sufficiently careful analysis of reported increases from different parts 
of the State. 

Several considerations sn^Dport this view that ilie Texas acreage has 
been heretofore overestimated. A brief glance at the development of 
the acreage in Texas for the past 25 years as compared with the rest of 
the cotton belt may not be inopportune. Prom 1879 to 1889 the 
cotton acreage of Texas increased 80.61 per cent, while in the States 
east of the Mississippi Eiver and Louisiana it increased an average of 
46 per cent. From 1889 to 1899 the Texas acreage of cotton increased 
77 per cent, practically the same as the previous decade. The Twelfth 
Census shows a total decrease of "improved"' farm land in Texas due 
to a difference of classification, but if we assume that the proportion of 
"improved" farm land to the total farm area was the same for the pre- 
vious censuses, it would seem that the increase of cotton acreage had 
almost exactly equaled the percentage of increase of "improved" farm 
land, or in other words, that the increase of acreage in cotton was due 
to the opening to settlement of new farms. From 1889 to 1895 the 
Texas acreage increased 48 per cent while the rest of the cotton States 
declined 11.6 per cent. From 1895 to 1899 Texas increased 14 per 
cent, while the rest of the cotton States increased 16.8 per cent, but not 
including Indian Territory and Oklahoma, they showed 14 per cent 
increase, the same as Texas. The cotton States, exclusive of Texas, 
Oklahoma and Indian Territory, decreased their cotton acreage 1.9 per 
cent from 1889 to 1899 according to the estimates of the United States 
Department of Agriculture, whereas the census gives an increase of 
slightly less than 2 per cent. In 1899 Texas had 35.6 per cent of her 
improved farm land in cotton, or 45.7 per cent of all crop acreage. At 
the same time practically the same ratio maintained in the largest cotton 
States of Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina. Thus in 
1899 Texas had been increasing her. cotton acreage at the same rate as 
the balance of the cotton belt for five years and had practically the same 
proportion of her farm acreage in cotton. From 1899 to 1904 the De- 
partment estimates would show an increase of 44 per cent in the acre- 
age for the cotton belt exclusive of Texas, and 22 to 28 per cent for 
Texas. We estimate the increase for Texas at 9 per cent. Since 1899 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas, 21 

Texas has been subject to many conditions affecting the cotton industry 
which have either been Tinknown or very much less important in other 
cotton States. During this time the press of the State and her agricul- 
tural leaders have night and day preached "diversification." That iliis 
has been heeded all Texans are aware. Trucking has become an in- 
creasingly important industry all through eastern, central and soutli- 
ern Texas. East Texas has seen a marvelous development of the fruit 
industry. The cotton acreage in the coast counties has undoubtedly 
been diminished by the rice and oil industries. An unprecedented flood 
of the Brazos in 1899, another in 1903. and the terrible storm of Sep- 
tember, 1900, all tended to diminish the cotton acreage in some of the 
most productive counties. In addition to all these factors making for 
the reduction of cotton acreage, the boll weevil has spread steadily 
north and eastward until it now injures fully half the acreage of the 
State and destroys practically one-half the crop in this territory. It is 
certainly unreasonable to suppose that, in the face of a constantly di- 
minishing yield per acre, planters in the injured district will continue 
to increase their acreage, though this has undoubtedly taken place to • 
some extent in single seasons. 

Notwithstanding these facts the counties uninjured by the boll weevil 
have increased 23 per cent from 1899 against 14 per cent from 1895 to 
1899, while the northwestern and western counties now containing 19 
per cent of the total acreage of the State have increased 51 per cent, a 
much greater rate of increase than that of the State for either the two 
previous decades, and undoubtedly coincident with the settling of new 
land as in the past. The average increase for the State is best shown 
by the thirty-seven northeastern and eastern counties, which produce 
35 per cent of the crop of the State, which have been practically un- 
affected by the boll weevil up to 1904, and which show an increase of 
10 per cent over 1899 in 1904. 

In making these estimates the writer has been impressed with the 
fact that by no means as careful studies and statistics concerning the 
cotton acreage have been made as for the cotton product. The final re- 
ports upon the cotton crop as secured from the ginners by the 
census approximate the total yield as nearly as possible to do 
so. But the acreage is determined but once in ten years, and 
all acreages published for other years are necessarily but "estimates.'* 
Inasmuch as all estimates of the size of the crop of a given year, 
and the consequent market prices, must be based upon the acreage, 
it would seem that if some means could be devised whereby the acreage 
could be determined more accurately it would be of the greatest advan- 
tage to all interested in cotton. This was formerly done by means of re- 
ports upon acreage from each county made to the Texas Commissioner 
of Agriculture based upon an actual canvass of the acreage by the 
county assessors, as published for the years 1887 to 1895. Only by some 
such well-organized system will accurate reports of the cotton acreage 
be secured. Tljat such reports of the acreage of this and other crops 
would be of the utmost value will hardly be questioned. Thousands of 
dollars are annually spent by brokers of staple crops to secure exactly 
this information. At the present time (July, 1905) there is consider- 
able comment by brokers in the daily press that crop reports by the 



23 Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 

State or National governments are unnecessary, as their inforraation 
is not relied upon and brokers maintain their own organizations at 
much expense to secure crop estimates. But if crop reports are secured 
only by private parties, the market will be influenced by them and the 
farmer will be at the mercy of the brokers. Furthermore, it has been 
demonstrated that in most years the government crop reports mere 
nearly 'approximate the trath than any estimates secured by private 
parties. Correct crop reports and estimates by the governinent. State 
or National, enable the farmer to sell his crops to as good advantage as 
the broker may buy. Hence what is needed in the farmers interest are 
better crop reports and better means for securing information, so that 
on all speculative crops the estimates may approach the actual condi- 
tions with the greatest possible accuracy. If the present discussion of 
the acreage of Texas, open to much error as the writer is well aware, 
owing to the sources from which the estimates were made, serves to 
bring out the necessity for more careful statistics for every county in 
Texas, his work will have accomplished much of its object. 

LOSSES DUE TO THE BOLL WEEVIL. 

In order to estimate the amount of loss due to the boll weevil from 
year to year, as well as for a proper discussion of the acreage, it is neces- 
sary to group the counties, basing these groups upon the spread of in- 
festation by the weevil. These groups are determined by (1) the year 
in which the counties first became infested, (2) the year in which coun- 
ties first became injured, and (3) arbitrary geographical groups of uii- 
infested or but slightly infested counties in which no appreciable injury 
has yet occurred. The spread of the Aveevil over the State up to August, 
1904, as given by the United -States Department of Agriculture and rec- 
ords of the State Entomologist, is shown in figure 1, and the groups 
of counties based upon this in figure 2. Of the southern counties in- 
fested by 1895 two groups are considered. The twelve of Southern 
Group A were somewhat injured in 1899, but since then have yielded 
practically a normal crop each season until 1904, while those of South- 
ern Group B, seven counties, have shown an increasing loss. Central 
Groups A and B were considered together until 1904 when Group A 
showed no decrease from the normal crop. Groups A and B, Central, 
include those counties infested up to 1898 and first injured in 1900. 
Central Group C comprises nineteen counties infested between 1898 and 
1901, and first showing a decrease in 1902 and 1903 for the most part. 
Central Group D comprises four counties in north central Texas and 
three in southeastern, first infested in 1902 and showing a decrease in 
1903. Central Group E includes ten counties in west central Texas first 
infested in 1902 but which have shown no appreciable loss from the 
previous normal crop. The remaining groups, Eastern, Northeastern, 
Western, Northwestern and SoutliAvestern, though somewhat infested in 
part, showed no decrease up to 1903, for which year these tables were 
first prepared. In 1904, six of the thirteen Eastern Group showed a 
decrease undoubtedly due to the weevil, which is shown in Table 1. 
It will be noted that except the difi^erent Central Groups, these groups 
of counties form fairly well-marked natural geographical divisions of 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 33 

the State. The Central Groups are made merely for convenience in 
estimating the damage from year to year and show very strikingly the 
fact often observed that it requires about two years after a county be- 
comes infested with the weevil before it is seriously injured. 

In determining in what year a county first showed a decided decrease 
probably due to the wee\iil we have used the average yield per acre for 
that county from 1887 to 1895 as the average crop. If the average for 
the second year (or when the exact date of first infestation was un- 
known^ any year beginning with the second year) was materially less 
than the average for that county, providing that the uninfested coun- 
ties showed no decrease from normal yield in that year, that county was 
considered as first injured by the weevil in that year. If the uninfested 
counties showed a loss in a year, the difference in yield per acre was 
deducted from the apparent decrease of a county supposedly injured for 
the first time. Also Avhere storms or floods Avere known to have seriously 
decreased the crop in certain counties, the injury was not attributed to 
the weevil in all cases. These latter factors and losses by other insects, 
it is of course impossible to accurately estimate. It is entirely safe to 
assume, however, that after the second year of infestation, the great 
bulk of the decrease is due to the weevil. 

After determining the year in which each infested county first showed 
marked decrease as nearly as possible, and grouping them accordingly, 
it is an easy matter to assemble the totals of the injured groups for each 
year as given in Table 1. The injured area for each year is shown in 
"figures 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, together with lines showing the progress of 
previous infestation as related to this injury. 

The total loss due to the weevil each j^ear was determined as follows: 
The yield per acre for the injured and iminjured areas was determined. 
The yield per acre for the injured counties was then subtracted from 
their normal yield per acre from 1887 to 1895, giving the "apparent'^ 
decrease for the injured area. The yield per acre for the uninjured 
area for 1899 was then compared with its average yield per acre from 
1887 to 1895, and the gain or loss computed in bales and bales per acre. 
Subsequent to 1899, instead of the yield per acre for the uninjured area 
from 1887 to 1895, was used the average of the years 1887 to 1895 and 
the years from 1899 to date inclusive, omitting 1896-1898 in which 
3'ears there are no means of forming estimates by counties. The large 
crop of 1900 increased this average yield per acre for the uninjured 
area materially, making it 0.02 bales more per acre and in 1904 it was 
0.05 bales per acre greater than the average from 1887 to 1895. If 
there was a gain in bales per acre in the uninjured area, the area of the 
injured counties was multiplied by the number of bales per acre gain 
for the uninjured counties and the result added to the "apparent" de- 
crease for the injured counties, giving the "total bales decrease in the 
injured counties." If, on the other hand, the uninjured counties showed 
a loss from the average of the previous years, the loss in bales per acre 
was multiplied by the acreage injured and the result deducted from the 
"apparent" injury. Thus due weight is given to the seasonal increase 
or decrease of the uninjured area in reckoning the amount of injury. 
Had the "apparent" decrease been increased by the difference between 
the yield per acre of the uninjured area for a given year and its average 



24 Boll Weevil axd Cotton Crop of Texas. 

between 1887 and 1895 the "total decrease" would have been very much 
greater than by using the average of those years plus that of years since 
1899 as given in column 9, Table 1. Had the average from 1887 to 
1895 alone been thus used there would have been shown a total decrease 
of 325.000 bales against 258,489 given in 1902, 725,000 against 500,000 
given in 1903, and about the same difference in 1904. 

From the "total decrease" must be subtracted the losses due to 
storms, floods, and insects such as the boll worm, which is prac- 
tically the only insect causing any large loss in the weevil injured area. 
These latter factors are exceedingly difficult to estimate. In 1899 there 
was a serious flood of the Brazos river, but it did not affect the injured 
counties. The Department of Agriculture estimates the injury due to 
the Galveston storm at 68,000 bales, and we have allowed 86,810 bales 
loss due to it and boll worm in 1900. 

It should be noted also that had we computed the loss by using the 
acreage figures of the Department of Agriculture, which are uniformly 
larger than our estimate, the loss due to the weevil would have been 
much larger, as the yield per acre of the injured counties would have 
been very much less than even the apparent differences in total acreages 
would indicate, for the Department of Agriculture has estimated many 
of the injured counties as having actually increased their acreage duj-- 
ing five years in which, in Table 2, we have indicated a decrease, which 
is supported by the best information obtainable. 

The methods employed in this estimate of the losses due to the weevil 
have thus been purposely made as conservative as possible, while at the 
same time making due allowance for the increased or decreased pro- 
duction for the uninjured part of the State in determining the differ- 
ence between the actual crop and what the normal crop should be for 
the injured area for the same years. 

Let us consider the decrease due to the weevil year by year somewhat 
more in detail. 

In 1899, the eighteen southern counties, practically those lying south 
of the Southern Pacific Eailroad, having 5 per cent of the acreage and 
producing 4 per cent of the crop of that year, yielded but 0.28 bales 
per acre against a normal 0.43 bales per acre, while the balance of the 
State showed a decrease of but 0.15 bales per acre. The total decrease 
of these counties was, therefore, 0.135 bales per acre, or 174,718 bales, 
at least 150.000 bales of which may be due to the weevil. It may be 
noticed that these counties were all infested up to 1895. During 1896 
and 1897 the weevil did not spread beyond the area infested in 1895. 
Probably nearly as large a loss occurred in these counties in 1898, were 
the acreage or crop figures available by counties for that year. 

In 1898 the weevil advanced as for north as Burleson and Brazos 
counties (fig. 1), and as a result two years later, in 1900, a marked 
decrease is found in the production of all these counties, as graphically 
shown in figure 4. In 1900, however, the counties of Southern Group 
A produced better than a normal crop and Southern Group B practically 
a normal crop, though 0.15 bale? per acre less than the increase in the 
balance of the State warranted. The thirteen counties of Central Group 
AB injured for the first time, yielded but 0.26 bales per acre, just half 
per acre that produced in the balance of the State. Together the 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 25 

twenty injured counties showed a decrease of 0.30 bales per acre or 
311,810 bales. From this must be deducted the loss due to the Gal- 
veston storm throughout south central Texas, which reduces the total 
loss to probably 200,000 bales. In 1900 the injured area was 15 per 
cent of the acreage of the State, three times that of 1899, and the in- 
jured area produced 18 per cent of the crop of 1899. 

In 1901 the injured territory remained practically the same as in 
1900, Caldwell county being the only one added. Though no records 
exist of the spread of the weevil in 1899, it is evident from the in- 
creased injury in 1902 and the area infested in 1901 that there was a 
considerable advance of infestation in 1900 and it seems probable that 
a very small migration in 1899, as in 1896-97, accounts for there being 
no larger area injured in 1901. The injured counties showed the same 
''apparent" decrease in 1901 as in 1900, but owing to a decrease of 0.05 
bales per acre for the balance of the State, the total real decrease was 
but about one-third that in 1900, or 100,930 bales. In other words, the 
injured counties compared with the yields of the other counties in the 
State made a gain of 0.20 bales jier acre in 1901 over 1900, though they 
actually produced but 0.01 bales per acre more. 

In 1902 about half of the counties infested between 1898 and 1901 
were added to the injured area of 1901, comprising nine of the coun- 
ties of Central Group C, making 26 per cent of the total acreage in- 
jured, which acreage produced 35 per cent of the total crop of 1899. 
It was, therefore, in 1902 that the most productive counties in Texas 
were first injured, as tlie per cent ol: the total product produced in the 
injured counties was about ;')5 jier cent greater than the per cent of the 
total acreage occupied by them. 

The decrease in production in the injured counties was also more 
serious than previously, the thirty-two injured counties producing but 
0.28 bales per acre, though owing to a decrease from normal of 0.03 
bales per acre for the balance of the State, the actual decrease was 0.14 
l)ales per acre, the same as in 1901, or 258,489 bales. From this must 
be deducted loss from the boll worm amounting to 5 per cent according 
to Prof. Mallj^'s estimate (see his Eeport on the Boll Worm, 1902), 
which would be approximately 25,500 bales, and loss due to the Brazos 
river flood of at least an equal amount, so that the probable total loss 
attnbutable to the weevil was about 200,000 bales, about the same as 
in 1900. ' 

The year 1903 witnessed an even greater relative enlargement of the 
injured area than 1902. All of the territory infested in 1901 and much 
of that which had been first reported infested in 1902, showed a 
marked decrease which was more striking in view of the fact that the 
balance of the State showed slightly better than a normal crop. Indeed, 
the advance of infestation and injury by the weevil may well be com- 
pared to the waves radiating from a pebble cast in water, the second 
following the first in concentric and ever-increasing circles, which lines 
of advance have, however, pushed more rapidly to the north in the case 
of the weevil; 38 per cent of the 1903 acreage, which produced 50 per 
cent of the crop in 1899, but only 26 per cent in 1903, and including 
some of the largest and most productive cotton counties of Texas, was 
injured in 1903. The injury in the counties previously injured, as 



26 Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Tesa-S. 

well as in the counties injured for the first time, was more serious than 
ever before, there being a yield of but 0.23 bales per acre in the 49 
injured counties against 0.43 previously. This was no doubt largely 
due to the exceedingly late and wet season throughout the most of the 
State, favorable to the development of the weevil. The decrease for 
the injured counties amounted to 0.21 bales per acre or a total of 
580,612. From this should be subtracted injury by the boll worm which 
was unusually severe, especially in Central Group D, probably amount- 
ing to 12 per cent for the whole forty-nine counties, leaving in round 
numbers 500,000 bales which may safely be attributed to injury by the 
boll weevil. The Southern Group A counties continued to show a nor- 
mal crop in sjDite of the weevil. 

The injury in 1904 was quite different in many respects from any 
previous years. The total acreage injured showed a decrease from that 
of 1903, due to the fact that nine counties in central Texas, Central 
Group A, Bell, Hays. Limestone and Williamson, having a total acreage 
of 8 per cent that of the State, and producing nearly 10 per cent of 
the total crop, produced better than a normal crop compared with the 
uninjured counties, though in 1903 they had all shown serious injury. 
In contrast to this encouraging feature, the twelve counties of Southern 
Grou]:) A, owing to a very mild winter, early spring, and allowing 
stubble cotton to remain over winter upon which the weevils com- 
menced to multiply early, produced but half a normal crop, for the 
first time showing serious injury since 1899. In addition to the in- 
jured area of 1903 were seven counties in east Texas and ten south- 
western counties, the outer limits of the area injured in 1904 being 
almost exactly those infested in 1902, except for the ten counties of 
Central Group E, which showed a better than normal crop, though 
many of them had been well infested in 1903 and all more or less in 
1902. Together the sixty-nine injured counties showed an "apparent'^ 
decrease of 0.14 bales per acre, which with the increase of 0.08 bales 
per acre for the balance of the State gave 0.22 bales per acre total loss, 
practically the same as in 1903, making 586,478 bales decrease, slightly 
larger than for 1903. In 1904 there was comparatively little injury 
from the boll worm and loss from flood, so that 550,000 bales may 
safely be charged to the boll weevil. Had the nine counties which pre- 
viously had shown a loss, but in 1904 made better than a normal crop, 
showed as much injury as those surrounding them, the total loss w5uld 
have approximated 700,000 bales. Had the ten counties of Central 
Group 3 been injured as much as the seven eastern counties after two 
years of infestation, there would have been 175,000 bales further de- 
crease. In other words, had the weevil been as injurious in the terri- 
tory infested two years or over as previously, there would have been a 
loss of 875,000 bales of cotton due to the weevil in 1904. That this 
was not the case and that a phenomenal cro]) was made was iindoubtedly 
due to the extremely favorable season, an early spring, hot summer, and 
a late growing season. These favorable weather conditions made pos- 
sible the best possible results from the "cultural methods'" of preventing 
injury by the weevil, consisting of eirly planting, early varieties, and 
thorough, continued cultivation. These methods were widely prac- 
ticed by progressive planters and undoubtedly were a large factor in 



Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 27 

producing a crop above the average for the uninjured counties, includ- 
ing nine of the largest counties which had previously shown serious 
loss, as well as lessening the loss in other counties. It should be borne 
in mind, however, that in spite of the large total crop the loss to over 
one-third the acreage of the State was as severe as in 1903 and was fully 
one-half the crop of those counties. Had there been no loss by the boll 
weevil in 1904 Texas would probably have produced 3,750,000 bales 
of cotton. 

Footing up the bill which the boll weevil has enforced payment by the 
State of Texas we find a total of 1,725,000 bales loss during the past 
six years. Since its arrival in Texas 2.000,000 bales, worth nearly 
$100,000,000, have midoubtedly been lost due to its devastations. If we 
consider the average yield of the injured territory as .438 bales per 
acre (averaging the six years), there has been a decrease of 43.2 per 
cent of the crop in this territory, averaging 0.182 bales per acre a year. 
In other words, 'it now takes 1.71 acres to produce the crop of one acre 
before the arrival of the weevil, or where 2.28 acres were formerly re- 
quired to produce a bale of cotton 3.9 acres are now necessary. 

THE FUTUBE OUTLOOK. 

What do these statistics teacli which will tend to mitigate a present 
loss of from $20,000,000 to $25,000,000 ? 

First, that as a whole this loss is increasing and that with a season 
such as 1903 the area now well infested by the weevil might show a 
loss of from 900,000 to 1,000,000 bales. 

Second, that in extreme southern Texas the weevil rarely seriously in- 
jures the crop if stubble cotton is not allowed to remain over winter in 
mild winters. 

Third, that there seems a probability that the weevil may not be so 
injurious in the western cotton counties. 

Fourth, that in a favorable or average season a fair crop can be grown 
in spite of the weevil by the use of better methods, such as early plant- 
ing, fertilization, better — more productive and earlier — varieties, more 
thorough, frequent and continued cultivation. It remains for future 
crops to show how much value these methods will have in an unfavorable 
year. It is the belief of the writer that these methods are of the greatest 
value and should be practiced intelligently by everyone, but he is prone 
to feel that not until the increase of the weevils is actually checked by 
the general destruction of the cotton stalks before frost in the fall, by 
the people generally, will there be a material reduction of loss by the 
weevil in at least one year out of three and possibly half of the time. 
It is high time that the State regulated the matter of the destruction of 
stumpage cotton in south Texas, and it should at least make experiments 
on a sufficiently large scale to demonstrate beyond any manner of doubt 
and to convince the most skeptical that the fall destruction of the 
stalks throughout the State is or is not the best means of controlling the 
pest, as advocated by all who have given it careful study.* 



♦Suggestions to this end, with n full discussion of the subject, were published by the 
writer in Farm and Ranch, October 8, 1904. 



28 Boll Weevil and Cotton Crop of Texas. 



LEGENDS FOR FIGURES ACCOMPANYING ARTICLE ON IN- 
JURY TO COTTON CROP BY BOLL WEEVIL.— Sanderson. 

Fig. 1. Map of Texas showing the gradual spread of the boll weevil 

to August, 1904. lines indicate probable infestation, but not 

actually reported. Lines for 1894, 1895, 1898, 1901 are those published 
or recorded by the Bureau of Entomology, U. S. Department of Agricul- 
ture, as are parts of those for 1903 and 1904. The line for 1902 is from 
records made mostly by Prof. F. W. Mally. The black line at the west 
indicates the western boundary of cotton culture in 1899. 

Fig. 2. Map of Texas showing the groups of counties used in tabula- 
tion. The counties underlined are part of those included under "Far 
Western," Table IV. 

Fig. 3. Counties injured by the boll weevil in 1899 are shaded. 

Fig. 4. Counties showing a marked decrease in yield due to the boll 
weevil in 1900 and 1901 are shaded. 

Fig. 5. Counties showing a marked decrease in yield due to the boll 
weevil are shaded. 

Fig, 6. Counties showing a marked decrease in yield due to the boll 
weevil in 1903 are shaded. 

Fig. 7. Counties showing a marked decrease in yield due to the boll 
weevil in 1904 are shaded. Counties injured by the weevil in 1903 
which yielded better than a normal crop in 1904 are underlined. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



000 888 423 7 





